[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <64ae6d27-d89b-401c-bf9e-027967e6b859@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2025 11:48:25 +0200
From: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
Cc: Xilin Wu <sophon@...xa.com>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-usb43dp-phy:
Document lanes mapping when not using in USB-C complex
On 10/6/25 11:43, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 9/30/25 9:39 AM, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> The QMP USB3/DP Combo PHY hosts an USB3 phy and a DP PHY on top
>> of a combo glue to route either lanes to the 4 shared physical lanes.
>>
>> The routing of the lanes can be:
>> - 2 DP + 2 USB3
>> - 4 DP
>> - 2 USB3
>>
>> The layout of the lanes was designed to be mapped and swapped
>> related to the USB-C Power Delivery negociation, so it supports
>> a finite set of mappings inherited by the USB-C Altmode layouts.
>>
>> Nevertheless those QMP Comby PHY can be used to drive a DisplayPort
>> connector, DP->HDMI bridge, USB3 A Connector, etc... without
>> an USB-C connector and no PD events.
>>
>> Document the data-lanes on numbered port@0 out endpoints,
>> allowing us to document the lanes mapping to DisplayPort
>> and/or USB3 connectors/peripherals.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
>> ---
>
> [...]
>
>> + endpoint@1:
>> + $ref: /schemas/graph.yaml#/$defs/endpoint-base
>> + description: USB Output lanes of the PHY when used with static mapping.
>> + The entry index is the USB3 lane in the order TX then RX, and the
>> + number is the PHY signal in the order RX0, TX0, TX1, RX1.> + unevaluatedProperties: false
>> +
>> + properties:
>> + data-lanes:
>
> Can this be described in a somewhat reasonable way to be non-compatible
> with Type-C properties for more validation?
I tried, but failed. Let me try again !
>
> If not, let's just maybe add a comment like
>
> # Static lane mappings are mutually exclusive with typec-mux/orientation-mux
Ack
Thanks,
Neil
>
> Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists