[PATCH v3 1/6] phy: add a driver for the Berlin SATA PHY

Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2014-05-14T10:13:03Z

Hi,

On Wednesday 14 May 2014 03:18 PM, Antoine T?nart wrote:
> The Berlin SoC has a two SATA ports. Add a PHY driver to handle them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Antoine T?nart <antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com>
> ---
> drivers/phy/Kconfig | 5 ++
> drivers/phy/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/phy/phy-berlin-sata.c | 180 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 186 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/phy/phy-berlin-sata.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/phy/Kconfig b/drivers/phy/Kconfig
> index 4906c27fa3bd..b31b1986fda4 100644
> --- a/drivers/phy/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/phy/Kconfig
> @@ -15,6 +15,11 @@ config GENERIC_PHY
> phy users can obtain reference to the PHY. All the users of this
> framework should select this config.
>
> +config PHY_BERLIN_SATA
> + bool
> + depends on ARCH_BERLIN && OF
> + select GENERIC_PHY
> +
> config PHY_EXYNOS_MIPI_VIDEO
> tristate "S5P/EXYNOS SoC series MIPI CSI-2/DSI PHY driver"
> depends on HAS_IOMEM
> diff --git a/drivers/phy/Makefile b/drivers/phy/Makefile
> index 7728518572a4..40278706ac1b 100644
> --- a/drivers/phy/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/phy/Makefile
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> #
>
> obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_PHY) += phy-core.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_PHY_BERLIN_SATA) += phy-berlin-sata.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_BCM_KONA_USB2_PHY) += phy-bcm-kona-usb2.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PHY_EXYNOS_DP_VIDEO) += phy-exynos-dp-video.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PHY_EXYNOS_MIPI_VIDEO) += phy-exynos-mipi-video.o
> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-berlin-sata.c b/drivers/phy/phy-berlin-sata.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..b08f76329a34
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-berlin-sata.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,180 @@
> +/*
> + * Marvell Berlin SATA PHY driver
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2014 Marvell Technology Group Ltd.
> + *
> + * Antoine T?nart <antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com>
> + *
> + * This file is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public
> + * License version 2. This program is licensed "as is" without any
> + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/phy/phy.h>
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +
> +#define HOST_VSA_ADDR 0x0
> +#define HOST_VSA_DATA 0x4
> +
> +#define CONTROL_REGISTER 0x0
> +#define MBUS_SIZE_CONTROL 0x4
> +
> +#define POWER_DOWN_SATA0 BIT(6)
> +#define POWER_DOWN_SATA1 BIT(14)
> +#define MBUS_WRITE_REQUEST_SIZE_128 (BIT(2) << 16)
> +#define MBUS_READ_REQUEST_SIZE_128 (BIT(2) << 19)
> +
> +#define BERLIN_SATA_PHY_NB 2
> +
> +#define to_berlin_sata_phy_priv(desc) \
> + container_of((desc), struct phy_berlin_priv, phys[(desc)->index])
> +
> +struct phy_berlin_desc {
> + struct phy *phy;
> + u32 val;
> + unsigned index;
> +};
> +
> +struct phy_berlin_priv {
> + void __iomem *base;
> + spinlock_t lock;
> + struct phy_berlin_desc phys[BERLIN_SATA_PHY_NB];

Can't we do away with hardcoding BERLIN_SATA_PHY_NB?
> +};
> +
> +static int phy_berlin_sata_power_on(struct phy *phy)
> +{
> + struct phy_berlin_desc *desc = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
> + struct phy_berlin_priv *priv = to_berlin_sata_phy_priv(desc);
> + u32 regval;
> +
> + spin_lock(&priv->lock);
> +
> + /* Power up PHY */
> + writel(CONTROL_REGISTER, priv->base + HOST_VSA_ADDR);
> + regval = readl(priv->base + HOST_VSA_DATA);
> + regval &= ~(desc->val);
> + writel(regval, priv->base + HOST_VSA_DATA);
> +
> + /* Configure MBus */
> + writel(MBUS_SIZE_CONTROL, priv->base + HOST_VSA_ADDR);
> + regval = readl(priv->base + HOST_VSA_DATA);
> + regval |= MBUS_WRITE_REQUEST_SIZE_128 | MBUS_READ_REQUEST_SIZE_128;
> + writel(regval, priv->base + HOST_VSA_DATA);
> +
> + spin_unlock(&priv->lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int phy_berlin_sata_power_off(struct phy *phy)
> +{
> + struct phy_berlin_desc *desc = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
> + struct phy_berlin_priv *priv = to_berlin_sata_phy_priv(desc);
> + u32 regval;
> +
> + spin_lock(&priv->lock);
> +
> + /* Power down PHY */
> + writel(CONTROL_REGISTER, priv->base + HOST_VSA_ADDR);
> + regval = readl(priv->base + HOST_VSA_DATA);
> + regval |= desc->val;
> + writel(regval, priv->base + HOST_VSA_DATA);
> +
> + spin_unlock(&priv->lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct phy_ops phy_berlin_sata_ops = {
> + .power_on = phy_berlin_sata_power_on,
> + .power_off = phy_berlin_sata_power_off,
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> +};
> +
> +static struct phy_berlin_desc desc[] = {
> + { .val = POWER_DOWN_SATA0 },
> + { .val = POWER_DOWN_SATA1 },
> + { },
> +};
> +
> +static int phy_berlin_sata_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + struct phy *phy;
> + struct phy_provider *phy_provider;
> + struct phy_berlin_priv *priv;
> + struct resource *res;
> + struct device_node *child;
> + u8 phy_id;
> +
> + priv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!priv)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> + priv->base = devm_ioremap(dev, res->start, resource_size(res));
> + if (IS_ERR(priv->base))
> + return PTR_ERR(priv->base);
> +
> + dev_set_drvdata(dev, priv);
> + spin_lock_init(&priv->lock);
> +
> + for_each_child_of_node(dev->of_node, child) {
> + if (of_property_read_u8(child, "reg", &phy_id))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (phy_id >= BERLIN_SATA_PHY_NB) {
> + dev_err(dev, "invalid reg in node %s\n", child->name);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + phy = devm_phy_create(dev, &phy_berlin_sata_ops, NULL);
> + if (IS_ERR(phy)) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to create PHY for node %s\n",
> + child->name);
> + return PTR_ERR(phy);
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * By default the PHY node is used to request and match a PHY.
> + * We describe one PHY per sub-node here. Use the right node.
> + */
> + phy->dev.of_node = child;
> +
> + priv->phys[phy_id].phy = phy;
> + priv->phys[phy_id].val = desc[phy_id].val;
> + priv->phys[phy_id].index = phy_id;
> + phy_set_drvdata(phy, &priv->phys[phy_id]);
> +
> + /* Make sure the PHY is off */
> + phy_berlin_sata_power_off(phy);
> +
> + phy_provider = devm_of_phy_provider_register(&phy->dev,
> + of_phy_simple_xlate);
> + if (IS_ERR(phy_provider))
> + return PTR_ERR(phy_provider);

was this intentional? registering multiple PHY providers?

Thanks
Kishon