From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] drivers: phy: add generic PHY framework Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 18:51:15 +0530 Message-ID: <5162C44B.90501@ti.com> References: <1364993634-6378-1-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <1364993634-6378-2-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <515CC123.4060402@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <515CC123.4060402@wwwdotorg.org> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: balbi@ti.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, arnd@arndb.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, sylvester.nawrocki@gmail.com, rob@landley.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, cesarb@cesarb.net, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony@atomide.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, rob.herring@calxeda.com, b-cousson@ti.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, eballetbo@gmail.com, javier@dowhile0.org, mchehab@redhat.com, santosh.shilimkar@ti.com, broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com, swarren@nvidia.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Thursday 04 April 2013 05:24 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 04/03/2013 06:53 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> The PHY framework provides a set of APIs for the PHY drivers to >> create/destroy a PHY and APIs for the PHY users to obtain a reference to the >> PHY with or without using phandle. To obtain a reference to the PHY without >> using phandle, the platform specfic intialization code (say from board file) >> should have already called phy_bind with the binding information. The binding >> information consists of phy's device name, phy user device name and an index. >> The index is used when the same phy user binds to mulitple phys. >> >> PHY drivers should create the PHY by passing phy_descriptor that has >> describes the PHY (label, type etc..) and ops like init, exit, suspend, resume, >> power_on, power_off. >> >> The documentation for the generic PHY framework is added in >> Documentation/phy.txt and the documentation for the sysfs entry is added >> in Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-phy and the documentation for >> dt binding is can be found at >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-bindings.txt > >> diff --git a/include/linux/phy/phy.h b/include/linux/phy/phy.h > >> +extern struct phy *devm_phy_create(struct device *dev, const char *label, >> + struct device_node *of_node, int type, struct phy_ops *ops, >> + void *priv); > > Can't the function get of_node from dev->of_node? > > I wonder if we shouldn't split up the registration a bit though: > > A function which registers a PHY object itself. That's the function above. > > A function which registers a DT-based PHY provider. > > Then, the of_xlate op would be part of the PHY provider, not part of > some random PHY that happens to exist on that node. So: Yeah. Makes sense to me. By this we can avoid struct phy * to represent two different things (phy provider and phy instance). Thanks Kishon