linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] phy: add a driver for the Rockchip SoC internal USB2.0 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:41:38 -0800
From:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
Cc:	Yunzhi Li <lyz@...k-chips.com>,
	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	jwerner@...omium.org, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Tao Huang <huangtao@...k-chips.com>,
	Chris <zyw@...k-chips.com>, Eddie Cai <cf@...k-chips.com>,
	"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] phy: add a driver for the Rockchip SoC internal
 USB2.0 PHY

Kishon,

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:27 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com> wrote:
> I didn't mean that. You can get rid of this entire xlate stuff if you use
> something like below
>
> phy@xxx {
>         compatible = "";
>         phy1:usb_phy {
>         }
>         phy2:usb_phy {
>         };
> };
>
>
> usb@xx {
>         compatible = "";
>         phys = <&phy1>; //doesn't need xlate
>         /* this needs xlate
>            phys = <&phy 1>;
>         */
>         phy-names = "phy";
> };

Is the syntax you proposed really better?  Are you saying that you
advocate never using "#phy-cells" other than 0 for new bindings?  Is
that your own personal preference, or is there a discussion somewhere
where everyone agreed on this?

My vote is that since "phy-cells" exists and is part of the generic
phy bindings that it's meant to be used whenever you have a single PHY
driver that controls multiple PHYs.


-Doug
--
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/