From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] phy: driver for Conexant Digicolor internal USB PHY Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 21:16:40 +0530 Message-ID: <551AC160.8060202@ti.com> References: <6284a7672647d46100281959552f9787f98bb552.1427430989.git.baruch@tkos.co.il> <4a9ceb0a240d49dd6a68d50c78f85d310d4b932f.1427430989.git.baruch@tkos.co.il> <201503281633.02801.marex@denx.de> <20150331113448.GN12479@tarshish> <551ABCBE.3030005@ti.com> <20150331154119.GO12479@tarshish> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150331154119.GO12479@tarshish> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Baruch Siach Cc: Marek Vasut , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Tuesday 31 March 2015 09:11 PM, Baruch Siach wrote: > Hi Kishon, > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 08:56:54PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> On Tuesday 31 March 2015 05:04 PM, Baruch Siach wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 04:33:02PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>> On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 05:36:29 AM, Baruch Siach wrote: >>>>> Add a driver for the USB PHY on the Conexant CX92755 SoC, from the >>>>> Digicolor series of SoCs. The PHY is connected to the on-chip chipidea >>>>> usb2 host. >>>>> >>>>> The hardware is somewhat similar to the phy-mxs-usb.c usb_phy, but it is >>>>> different enough to merit its own driver. Also, this driver uses the >>>>> generic phy infrastructure. >>>> >>>> the register set looks very similar to MXS one indeed. How is it different >>>> please ? >>> >>> Almost of the bits that are defined in the MXS USBPHY_CTRL register are not >>> defined in the Digicolor one. Some have different meaning, and some are >>> reserved. OTOH, the Digicolor USBPHY_CTRL register uses all bits in the 1-13 >>> range. Also, the Digicolor phy does not have anatop registers. >> >> I think we should try adding support for this in the same driver. > > The only code that can actually be shared between the driver is the two lines > usb_phy .on_connect callback routine. The init sequence that takes most of the > digicolor driver is totally different. Using a single driver for both PHYs > does not make much sense, IMHO. > > Besides, phy-mxs-usb.c uses the deprecated usb_phy framework. So we first need > to port this driver to the generic phy framework. Doesn't your driver also use the usb_phy framework? -Kishon