[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFp+6iHkZJ9xVaS6ksp_zMR3332uxZpPohTiRUrbCJr+Gm0gvA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 14:03:42 +0530
From: Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@...il.com>
To: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
Cc: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
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>,
Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>,
Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] phy: Add provision for tuning phy.
Hi Kishon,
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 December 2013 12:08 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>> 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.
>
> how about 'calibrate'?
Hmm, seems like a better name :-)
>
> Thanks
> Kishon
>>
>>>
>>> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists