Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] phy: Add exynos-simple-phy driver

From: Rahul Sharma
Date: Fri May 16 2014 - 05:42:11 EST


On 16 May 2014 03:14, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 15.05.2014 06:01, Rahul Sharma wrote:
>> Thanks Tomasz,
>>
>> On 15 May 2014 01:31, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Hi Rahul, Tomasz,
>> [snip]
>>>> + simplephys: simple-phys@10040000 {
>>>> + compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-simple-phy";
>>>
>>> Missing reg property or unnecessary @unit-address suffix in node name.
>>
>> I should have removed "@unit-address". I will change this.
>>
>>>
>>>> + samsung,pmu-syscon = <&pmu_system_controller>;
>>>> + #phy-cells = <1>;
>>>> + };
>>>
>>> In general, the idea is quite good, but I think this should rather bind
>>> to the main PMU node, since this is just a part of the PMU, not another
>>> device in the system. This also means that the PMU node itself should be
>>> the PHY provider.
>>>
>>
>> Please correct me if I got you wrong. You want somthing like this:
>>
>> pmu_system_controller: system-controller@10040000 {
>> ...
>> simple_phys: simple-phys {
>> compatible = "samsung,exynos5420-simple-phy";
>> ...
>> };
>> };
>
> Not exactly.
>
> What I meant is that the PMU node itself should be the PHY provider, e.g.
>
> pmu_system_controller: system-controller@10040000 {
> /* ... */
> #phy-cells = <1>;
> };
>
> and then the PMU node should instantiate the Exynos simple PHY driver,
> as this is a driver for a facility existing entirely inside of the PMU.
> Moreover, the driver should be rather called Exynos PMU PHY.
>
> I know this isn't really possible at the moment, but with device tree we
> must design things carefully, so it's better to take a bit more time and
> do things properly.
>
> So my opinion on this is that there should be a central Exynos PMU
> driver that claims the IO region and instantiates necessary subdrivers,
> such as Exynos PMU PHY driver, Exynos CLKOUT driver, Exynos cpuidle
> driver and more, similar to what is being done in drivers/mfd.

Hi Tomasz,



>
> Now, there is already ongoing effort to convert current freestanding PMU
> configuration code in mach-exynos into a full-fledged PMU driver, but
> not exactly in the same direction as I stated above. I'll try to
> cooperate with Pankaj, who is responsible for this work to make this go
> into the right track.
>
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/