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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 12 Dec 2014 11:17:01 +0530
From:	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
To:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
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

Hi,

On Friday 12 December 2014 12:11 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> 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

No. It can still be used for configuring the PHY. For example, in the case of
PIPE3 PHY we configure it to USB PHY, SATA PHY or PCIE PHY depending on to
which controller the PHY is connected to.

I feel using phy-cells just for differentiating the PHY is pointless when you
have a separate node for each PHY.

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/