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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 14:36:19 +0530 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com> To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> CC: <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel@...inux.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] phy: miphy365x: Add Device Tree bindings for the MiPHY365x Hi, On Wednesday 02 July 2014 05:36 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 02 Jul 2014, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> On Monday 30 June 2014 06:31 PM, Lee Jones wrote: >>> The MiPHY365x is a Generic PHY which can serve various SATA or PCIe >>> devices. It has 2 ports which it can use for either; both SATA, both >>> PCIe or one of each in any configuration. >>> >>> Cc: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com> >>> Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> >>> Acked-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com> >>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> >>> --- >>> .../devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-miphy365x.txt | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-miphy365x.txt >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-miphy365x.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-miphy365x.txt >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000..d75f300 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-miphy365x.txt >>> @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ >>> +STMicroelectronics STi MIPHY365x PHY binding >>> +============================================ >>> + >>> +This binding describes a miphy device that is used to control PHY hardware >>> +for SATA and PCIe. >>> + >>> +Required properties: >>> +- compatible : Should be "st,miphy365x-phy" >>> +- #phy-cells : Should be 2 (See second example) >>> + First cell is the port number from: >>> + - MIPHY_PORT_0 >>> + - MIPHY_PORT_1 >> >> I'm just thinking if we can directly give phandle to the sub-node >> (channel0/channel1 or port0/port1) we won't need this information in the PHY >> specifier. This might need some modification in the phy-core but that can be done. > > If we do that, we need a new property to identify the port number. I > figured using an existing cell to identify the port would be better > than to try an introduce yet another property. If we can directly give phandle to the sub-node where do you think port number would be used? Thanks 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