[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:39:11 +0530
From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
To: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>,
<martin.petersen@...cle.com>, <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <subhashj@...eaurora.org>,
<bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, <vinholikatti@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] qcom-ufs: phy/hcd: Refactor phy initialization code
Hi,
On Friday 04 August 2017 12:18 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
> Refactoring the qcom-ufs phy and host controller code to move
> further towards the generic phy usage. Right now the qcom-ufs exports
> a bunch of APIs that are used by the host controller to initialize
> the phy.
> With this patch series, we populate the phy_init() which was a no-op
> earlier. The host controller then calls the phy_init() at the designated
> place rather than doing it invariably in ufs_hcd_init().
>
> As part of this series, we introduce phy modes for ufs phy.
> The M-PHY has two data rates defined for each generations (Gears) -
> Rate A and Rate B. These can serve as the two modes of ufs HS phy.
> Host controller can direct the phy to set the respective configurations
> based on the phy modes.
>
> The patch-series has been tested with necessary dt patches on db820c.
Can the first 3 patches go independently of the other 2 or should all this be
merged together?
Thanks
Kishon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists