From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754023Ab3KBRRp (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Nov 2013 13:17:45 -0400 Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.40]:60196 "EHLO arroyo.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753394Ab3KBRRo (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Nov 2013 13:17:44 -0400 Message-ID: <52753387.5030202@ti.com> Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 22:46:55 +0530 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomasz Figa CC: , Matt Porter , Felipe Balbi , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Kumar Gala , Ian Campbell , Christian Daudt , Paul Zimmerman , Devicetree List , Linux USB List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linaro Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] phy: add phy_get_bus_width()/phy_set_bus_width() calls References: <1383335158-19730-1-git-send-email-matt.porter@linaro.org> <1383335158-19730-2-git-send-email-matt.porter@linaro.org> <2395941.Lp2U7sdS37@flatron> In-Reply-To: <2395941.Lp2U7sdS37@flatron> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Tomasz, On Saturday 02 November 2013 06:44 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > Hi Matt, > > On Friday 01 of November 2013 15:45:50 Matt Porter wrote: >> This adds a pair of APIs that allows the generic PHY subsystem to >> provide information on the PHY bus width. The PHY provider driver may >> use phy_set_bus_width() to set the bus width that the PHY supports. >> The controller driver may then use phy_get_bus_width() to fetch the >> PHY bus width in order to properly configure the controller. > > I somehow does not like this. If we take this path for any further > properties that we may need, we will end up with a lot of consumer > specific properties stored in a PHY object having their own accessor > functions. Only after all of us feel that a property is *generic* enough, we allow it to be added in the PHY object. > > Since this is just an integration detail, what about simply adding this as > a property in device tree node of the OTG controller (and pdata if > considering non-DT support)? We already had a discussion about this and the dt maintainers suggested the property should be in the PHY. [1] [1] -> http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg08851.html Thanks Kishon