[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <00cbc2a1-b4c1-46a2-8234-f66edc19fac9@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 10:08:28 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Peter Geis <pgwipeout@...il.com>, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc: zyw@...k-chips.com, kever.yang@...k-chips.com, frank.wang@...k-chips.com,
william.wu@...k-chips.com, wulf@...k-chips.com,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, Alex Bee <knaerzche@...il.com>,
Algea Cao <algea.cao@...k-chips.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...labora.com>,
Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@...ow.org>, Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>,
Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@...k-chips.com>, FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@...xa.com>,
Johan Jonker <jbx6244@...il.com>, Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Trevor Woerner <twoerner@...il.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Zhang Yubing <yubing.zhang@...k-chips.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/6] rockchip: add a functional usb3 phy driver for
rk3328
On 15/01/2025 02:26, Peter Geis wrote:
>
> This is my newly reworked phy driver for the rk3328 usb3 phy. It is
> based loosely on my original version, but as of now almost nothing of
> the original driver remains. The main fix here is the discovery of
> BIT(6) in the interrupt enable grf register fixes the usb3 disconnection
> detection (mostly). On occasion an unpopulated usb3 hub will take
> several seconds to disconnect. However this means all of the hack around
> work to reset the usb core manually is no longer required.
>
BTW, RFC for some maintainers means "do not review, work-in-progress".
For some means "review, but low priority" or "review, but for sure I
have bugs here". I usually review and then someone responds: "it is not
for review, it is just RFC", so to avoid my wasted time please always
mention in cover letter why this is RFC. What do you expect here or why
this is not ready for review as normal patch.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists