From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] phy: phy-amxxxx-usb: Add PHY driver for amxxxx platform Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:53:41 +0200 Message-ID: <51F77F15.7090306@linutronix.de> References: <1374237277-17769-1-git-send-email-george.cherian@ti.com> <1374237277-17769-3-git-send-email-george.cherian@ti.com> <20130729151754.GB827@linutronix.de> <51F74CEC.8040407@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51F74CEC.8040407@ti.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: George Cherian Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, balbi@ti.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, kishon@ti.com List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On 07/30/2013 07:19 AM, George Cherian wrote: >> So from what I see now, it is most likely the easiest thing to just = add >> that wakeup to the phy driver I posted. Do you agree? >=20 > The whole idea of writing a seperate phy driver was to use the generi= c > phy framework > and most of the amxxxx devices have the same phy (eg am335x, am437x). > Now since the register is shared in am335x for phy_wkup (Not in the c= ase > of am437x) > how are you planning to map it. I feel if omap_control_usb can deleg= ate > the writes > to phy_wkup, phy_on and phy_off, it makes the life simpler. that omap-control driver looks a little strange. It has a compatible field saying ti,omap-control-usb and then it requires additionally a ti,type property which should have been avoided. But back to the initial problem. I don't really like the idea of touching in the control-module registers but others do it as well. So the idea of a control driver doesn't sound that bad. - an am335x-reset device - a phy driver with a reference to that reset device. - non-standard phy calls for power & wak eup on/off. Let me think about it. >=20 > Thoughts??? I think I buy it but give me a bit=E2=80=A6 >=20 Sebastian