linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] phy: qcom: Add Qualcomm PCIe 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:	Tue, 19 May 2015 17:41:43 -0500
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:	Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@...sol.com>
Cc:	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	Mathieu Olivari <mathieu@...eaurora.org>,
	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] phy: qcom: Add Qualcomm PCIe PHY

On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 06:24:10PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> On 05/04/2015 05:35 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Monday 04 May 2015 06:12 PM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> >> Add a PCIe PHY driver used by PCIe host controller driver
> >> on Qualcomm SoCs like Snapdragon 805.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@...sol.com>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/phy/Kconfig         |    9 ++
> >>   drivers/phy/Makefile        |    1 +
> >>   drivers/phy/phy-qcom-pcie.c |  291
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > Why do you need a new PHY driver for this? Why not use the existing QCOM
> > PHY driver. I can see the registers used here in phy-qcom-ufs-qmp-14nm.h?
> 
> I agree that on first glance there are similarities, but I'm not sure
> does the PHYs are the same IP blocks. Or at least they are different
> revisions which have too many differences. So trying to combine them
> will lead to more code than now.
> 
> Either way I will try to understand how many the differences are.

Ping, where are we with this?  Should I wait for something else, or are you
convinced there's enough difference to warrant a new PHY driver, Kishon?

Bjorn
--
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/