[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 15:14:18 +0530
From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
To: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
Rahul Sharma <r.sh.open@...il.com>,
Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>
CC: Tomasz Stanislawski <t.stanislaws@...sung.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Rahul Sharma <rahul.sharma@...sung.com>,
sunil joshi <joshi@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] phy: Add exynos-simple-phy driver
Hi,
On Wednesday 09 April 2014 03:31 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/04/14 11:12, Rahul Sharma wrote:
>> Idea looks good. How about keeping compatible which is independent
>> of SoC, something like "samsung,exynos-simple-phy" and provide Reg
>> and Bit through phy provider node. This way we can avoid SoC specific
>> hardcoding in phy driver and don't need to look into dt bindings for
>> each new SoC.
>
> I believe it is a not recommended approach.
Why not? We should try to avoid hard coding in the driver code. Moreover by
avoiding hardcoding we can make it a generic driver for single bit PHYs.
Cheers
Kishon
--
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