linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] phy: add a driver for the Berlin SATA 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, 14 May 2014 20:51:44 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
	thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com, zmxu@...vell.com,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Antoine Ténart 
	<antoine.tenart@...e-electrons.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kishon@...com, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com, jszhang@...vell.com,
	tj@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] phy: add a driver for the Berlin SATA PHY

On Wednesday 14 May 2014 20:42:16 Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> >> For the driver, Antoine then would have to squeeze all PHY register
> >> mangling in phy-berlin2.c and see how to make ahci-platform aware of
> >> individual port nodes (I haven't looked up if it already exists, sorry)
> >> and announce only enabled port child nodes, right?
> > 
> > I've been thinking some more about this aspect. I don't actually have
> > a strong opinion on whether it's better to use the generic ahci-platform
> > driver, or to keep the multi-phy support as a special variant for
> > berlin. If we do the latter, it would however be good to define the
> > binding in a way that lets us later merge things into the generic phy
> > driver in case we get more of the same.
> 
> Hmm, IMHO multi-phy support is orthogonal to ahci-platform, isn't it?
> ahci-platform needs to know about the phy property and calls some
> helper that deals with the phy-specifier?
> 
> About a generic _phy_ driver, I am not so sure if berlin is the best
> template right now 
> 
> So, my call would be:
> - make ahci-platform aware of port sub-nodes and phy properties
> - have a berlin specific PHY driver

I'm not sure if we need sub-nodes per port, it should be enough
to have an array of phys, plus a way to match them up with the
ports.

	Arnd
--
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/