linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 4/5] dt-bindings: phy: realtek: Add the doc about the Realtek SoC USB 2.0 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]

Message-ID: <d515bfed030d4499b16050d492e1ec23@realtek.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2023 09:27:25 +0000
From:   Stanley Chang[昌育德] 
        <stanley_chang@...ltek.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
CC:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        Ray Chi <raychi@...gle.com>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Michael Grzeschik <m.grzeschik@...gutronix.de>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>,
        Flavio Suligoi <f.suligoi@...m.it>,
        "linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 4/5] dt-bindings: phy: realtek: Add the doc about the Realtek SoC USB 2.0 PHY

> > I only control a register, it is not needed a driver of power domain.
> 
> Aren't many power domains just a registers? What about other drivers?
> Don't you want in other driver control LDO of something else? And in other
> something else?

I will use power domain to instead this.

> > Would "port" be more appropriate?
> >
> > For example,
> > Using phy@0 and phy@1:
> >     usb_port1_usb2phy: usb-phy@...14 {
> >         compatible = "realtek,rtd1395-usb2phy", "realtek,usb2phy";
> >         reg = <0x132c4 0x4>, <0x31280 0x8>;
> >         #address-cells = <1>;
> >         #size-cells = <0>;
> >         #phy-cells = <0>;
> >         realtek,usb-ctrl = <&usb_ctrl>;
> >
> >         phy@0 {
> >             reg = <0>;
> 
> So such child is a NAK... you have nothing here. But it's unrelated topic.
Here is for simple, so some items ignore.

> >         };
> >         phy@1 {
> >             reg = <1>;
> >         };
> >     };
> >
> > Change: port@0 and port@1
> >     usb_port1_usb2phy: usb-phy@...14 {
> >         compatible = "realtek,rtd1395-usb2phy", "realtek,usb2phy";
> >         reg = <0x132c4 0x4>, <0x31280 0x8>;
> >         #address-cells = <1>;
> >         #size-cells = <0>;
> >         #phy-cells = <0>;
> >         realtek,usb-ctrl = <&usb_ctrl>;
> >
> >         prot@0 {
> >             reg = <0>;
> >         };
> >         port@1 {
> >             reg = <1>;
> >         };
> >     };
> 
> This is not the answer. This is the provider. How do you reference it from the
> consumer.


> Upstream your entire DTS. It's frustrating to try to understand your DTS from
> pieces of information you are sharing. Also very time consuming and you are
> not the only one sending patches for review...

Sorry to take up a lot of your time.
Apparently I don't know enough about dts.
I will reference more device tree document to understand the relating between DTS and hardware.

Thanks,
Stanley