linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] phy: samsung: move the Samsung specific phy files to "samsung" directory

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]

Message-ID: <CAFp+6iF9gzYzvq3JtyjeDjq5S9Q+G-Ly+P3gjdBzoT3pJVVYHw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 12 Mar 2017 22:50:50 +0530
From:   Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
        Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>, kamil@...as.org,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
        inux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] phy: samsung: move the Samsung specific phy files to
 "samsung" directory

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Vivek Gautam
> <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>> Hi Kishon,
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Thursday 09 March 2017 05:03 PM, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
>>>> Make the "samsung" directory and move the Samsung specific files to
>>>> there for maintaining the files relevant to Samsung.
>>>
>>> The number of phy drivers in drivers/phy is getting unmanageable. I think this
>>> is a good step to make it a little better. Can you also add a MAINTAINER for
>>> drivers/phy/samsung?
>>
>> I remember making a similar attempt in past [1], but that time we couldn't
>> reach an agreement as to whether group the phy drivers based on
>> vendors or based on the type of phy.
>>
>> If you are fine with grouping the drivers for each vendor, I hope you can
>> consider picking that patch (I can respin the patch based on linux-phy/next).
>> Other driver maintainers were also cool with that older patch.
>>
>> Let me know your comments.
>>
>> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8762561/
>
> I am fine with the vendor approach. We follow this also for other
> sub-blocks, although usually they are strictly related to one type of
> device (e.g. clock controller).

Right. Vendor approach gives us enough room.
Grouping based on the phy type doesn't allow few combo phys that
support multiple protocols (phy types).
Qualcomm's qmp phy is one such example. It is a phy that supports
PCIe, USB, UFS and few other phy types.
I believe there are other vendors as well that have combo phys
supporting multiple protocols.


Regards
Vivek

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project