linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 23/24] arm64: dts: qcom: glymur: Add USB support

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: <26eafedd-a3e2-4234-9237-4cf7282c0d19@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 10:42:42 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Wesley Cheng <wesley.cheng@....qualcomm.com>,
        Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>,
        Pankaj Patil <pankaj.patil@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 23/24] arm64: dts: qcom: glymur: Add USB support

On 9/26/25 3:09 AM, Wesley Cheng wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/25/2025 3:59 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 9/25/25 12:54 PM, Abel Vesa wrote:
>>> On 25-09-25 11:58:29, Pankaj Patil wrote:
>>>> From: Wesley Cheng <wesley.cheng@....qualcomm.com>
>>>>
>>>> The Glymur USB system contains 3 USB type C ports, and 1 USB multiport
>>>> controller.  This encompasses 5 SS USB QMP PHYs (3 combo and 2 uni) and 5
>>>> M31 eUSB2 PHYs.  The controllers are SNPS DWC3 based, and will use the
>>>> flattened DWC3 QCOM design.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Wesley Cheng <wesley.cheng@....qualcomm.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Patil <pankaj.patil@....qualcomm.com>
>>>> ---
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> +
>>>> +        usb_1_ss0: usb@...0000 {
>>>
>>> This is usb_1_ss0, but then you have usb1_ss1 ?
>>
>> I'm in favor of just calling it USB0/1/2/MP/HS because that's what it is..
>>
> 
> I never really understood why we have:
> usb_1_ss0_hsphy
> usb_1_ss0_qmpphy
> 
> usb_1_ss1_hsphy
> usb_1_ss1_qmpphy
> ...
> 
> Not sure why we have the usb_1* tag for the primary and secondary PHYs. I think it'd be simpler to just do what Konrad mentioned:
> 
> usb0_hsphy0
> usb0_qmpphy0
> usb1_hsphy0
> usb1_qmpphy0
> usb2_hsphy0
> usb2_qmpphy0
> usb_mp_hsphy0
> usb_mp_hsphy1
> usb_mp_qmpphy0
> usb_mp_qmphy1
> 
> then controllers can be
> 
> usb_0_ss
> usb_1_ss
> usb_2_ss

I'd get rid of the _ss suffix too, we don't need to be super specific
(plus they support ss+ /or whatever the official naming is/ on some
platforms and not others and uniformity is good)

Konrad