linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] phy: Add provision for tuning phy.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 11 Dec 2013 12:08:04 +0530
From:	Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@...il.com>
To:	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>,
	Linux USB Mailing List <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
	<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
	Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>, kishon <kishon@...com>,
	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>,
	Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] phy: Add provision for tuning phy.

Hi,


On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Heikki Krogerus
<heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> Hi,

Thanks for reviewing this.

>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 04:25:23PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>> Some PHY controllers may need to tune PHY post-initialization,
>> so that the PHY consumers can call phy-tuning at appropriate
>> point of time.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/phy/phy-core.c  |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>  include/linux/phy/phy.h |    7 +++++++
>>  2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-core.c b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> index 03cf8fb..68dbb90 100644
>> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> @@ -239,6 +239,26 @@ out:
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_power_off);
>>
>> +int phy_tune(struct phy *phy)
>> +{
>> +     int ret = -ENOTSUPP;
>> +
>> +     mutex_lock(&phy->mutex);
>> +     if (phy->ops->tune) {
>> +             ret =  phy->ops->tune(phy);
>> +             if (ret < 0) {
>> +                     dev_err(&phy->dev, "phy tuning failed --> %d\n", ret);
>> +                     goto out;
>> +             }
>> +     }
>> +
>> +out:
>> +     mutex_unlock(&phy->mutex);
>> +
>> +     return ret;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_tune);
>
> I think "setup" instead of "tune" is much more clear and reusable.

I think "setup" will look more like first time setting up the phy,
which is rather served by "init" callback.
This i thought would serve the purpose of over-riding certain PHY
parameters, which would not have been
possible at "init" time.
Please correct my thinking if i am unable to understand your point here.

>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> heikki
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



-- 
Best Regards
Vivek Gautam
Samsung R&D Institute, Bangalore
India
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/