linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/22] phy: qcom-qmp-combo: add DP configuration tables

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: <9a782abf-378d-08ab-aae2-683178622890@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 14 Nov 2022 12:50:05 +0300
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/22] phy: qcom-qmp-combo: add DP configuration tables

On 14/11/2022 11:38, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 10:39:12AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On 11/11/2022 11:56, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>> In preparation for merging the USB and DP configurations, add dedicated
>>> pointers for the DP serdes and tx tables to the configurations.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-combo.c | 45 ++++++++++++-----------
>>>    1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-combo.c b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-combo.c
>>> index 499368e19e00..b27d1821116c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-combo.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-combo.c
>>> @@ -816,6 +816,11 @@ struct qmp_phy_cfg {
>>>    	const struct qmp_phy_init_tbl *pcs_usb_tbl;
>>>    	int pcs_usb_tbl_num;
>>>    
>>> +	const struct qmp_phy_init_tbl *dp_serdes_tbl;
>>> +	int dp_serdes_tbl_num;
>>> +	const struct qmp_phy_init_tbl *dp_tx_tbl;
>>> +	int dp_tx_tbl_num;
>>> +
>>
>> I'd prefer to have DP-specific instance of struct qmp_phy_cfg_tbls here
>> instead of having separate dp-specific fields. WDYT?
> 
> No, I don't see any good reason for doing so currently.
> 
> You may be able to share a few pointers between some of the SoCs but
> only until it turns out they need to override certain sequences anyway
> (e.g. sc8280xp which mixes v4 and v5 tables currently).
> 
> You'd also need dedicated aggregate table structs for USB and DP and it
> seems all of this would just make things more opaque for little gain.

Forgot:

Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry