From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mason Subject: Re: sata_dwc_460ex driver Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 20:41:31 +0200 Message-ID: <574894DB.4090706@free.fr> References: <57485F96.8010001@free.fr> <57487C33.4020306@free.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp4-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.4]:47367 "EHLO smtp4-g21.free.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751307AbcE0Sl7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2016 14:41:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Gross Cc: Mans Rullgard , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo , Hans de Goede , Andy Shevchenko , Christian Lamparter , Srinivas Kandagatla , Kishon Vijay Abraham , Sebastian Frias On 27/05/2016 20:15, Andy Gross wrote: > On 27 May 2016 at 11:56, Mason wrote: > >> How come there are so few phy drivers in drivers/phy if most >> devices would typically require one? > > Short answer is that the generic phy framework is fairly recent > (~3 years old). A lot of phys are stuck off in other places like > drivers/usb/phy. At least that's my take on it. Where did the SATA phy drivers use to live? $ find -name phy ./drivers/usb/phy ./drivers/phy ./drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy ./drivers/net/phy ./drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/phy ./include/linux/phy ./include/dt-bindings/phy ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy ./Documentation/phy drivers/ata/ahci.h mentions SATA phy registers. Is AHCI standardized to the point that platform-specific PHYs are not required? Regards.