Re: [PATCH v1 3/4] phy: samsung: add Exynos2200 SNPS eUSB2 driver

From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
To: Ivaylo Ivanov <ivo.ivanov.ivanov1@gmail.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/4] phy: samsung: add Exynos2200 SNPS eUSB2 driver
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025 14:19:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <065ea296-480c-4ac4-bb4a-0fc2915b59f1@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f3d38b63-dc97-482e-aeac-b59e65f91424@gmail.com>

On 16/02/2025 10:51, Ivaylo Ivanov wrote:
>>
>>>>  You need to
>>>> integrate the changes, not create duplicated driver.
>>> I can do that, but it would be come a bit cluttered, won't it? Depends on
>>> if we want to follow the current oem-provided initialization sequence, or
>>> try and fully reuse what we have in there.
>>
>> I think it duplicates a lot, so it won't be clutter. We have many
>> drivers having common code and per-variant ops.
> 
> So the approach to take here is to make a common driver?

For example: one common module and two modules per each soc, because I
assume some per-soc stuff might be needed. But maybe even these two
modules are not necessary and everything could be in one driver.

> 
> What about the current modelling scheme, as-in taking the phandle to
> the usbcon phy and handling it?

What about it? Did you look at the bindings of qcom snps eusb2? Are you
saying you do not have here repeater? If so, then this phy phandle might
not be correct.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

-- 
linux-phy mailing list
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy