Re: [PATCH] ata: sata_rcar: Add RCAR Gen2 SATA PHY support

[Valentine <valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com>]

On 10/11/2013 01:41 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 02:00:35AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
>> [ CCed devicetree@vger.kernel.org as this involves DT compatibility strings ]
>
> Cheers!
>

Hi Mark,

>>
>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:08:03PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>>> RCAR Gen2 SoC has a different phy which is not compatible with
>>> the older H1/M1 versions. This adds OF/platform device table
>>> and PHY initialization callbacks for H2/M2 (Gen2) SoC.
>
> Is the PHY combined with the rest of the controller, or are they
> logically separate components in the SoC? I note that the Calxeda
> Highbank SATA controller driver treats the phy and the controller as
> separate entities, and describes the way the two are attached (though
> the driver handles both). Would a similar approach work here?
>

It seems to be described in the docs as a single entity with the rest of 
the controller. The phy registers are in the same address space block. 
We don't need to describe how the phy is attached to the SATA 
controller. In the future we may need some phy-specific configuration in 
the device tree. For example, to describe how clock generator is 
connected to the controller. I think this could be done with optional 
properties added to the SATA node if needed.

> [...]
>
>>> +static struct of_device_id sata_rcar_match[] = {
>>> +	{
>>> +		.compatible = "renesas,rcar-sata",
>>> +		.data = (void *)RCAR_SATA
>>> +	},
>>> +	{
>>> +		.compatible = "renesas,sata-r8a7790",
>>> +		.data = (void *)RCAR_GEN2_SATA
>>> +	},
>>> +	{
>>> +		.compatible = "renesas,sata-r8a7791",
>>> +		.data = (void *)RCAR_GEN2_SATA
>>> +	},
>>> +	{},
>
> These bindings will need documentation. A grep of any of these in
> mainline's Documentation/devicetree shows up nothing (not even the
> existing "renesas,rcar-sata" string used by the driver.

Indeed.
Since we need to adjust rcar-sata bindings and add documentation for it, 
which is not really related to Gen2 phy support, looks like it will be a 
separate patch.

>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>

Thanks,
Val.