From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751776AbaENUCF (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2014 16:02:05 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f48.google.com ([74.125.83.48]:63898 "EHLO mail-ee0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750906AbaENUCD (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2014 16:02:03 -0400 Message-ID: <5373CBAD.2010505@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 22:01:49 +0200 From: Tomasz Figa User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rahul Sharma , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org CC: a.hajda@samsung.com, t.stanislaws@samsung.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, kgene.kim@samsung.com, kishon@ti.com, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, sylvester.nawrocki@gmail.com, joshi@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] phy: Add exynos-simple-phy driver References: <1400095043-685-1-git-send-email-rahul.sharma@samsung.com> <1400095043-685-2-git-send-email-rahul.sharma@samsung.com> In-Reply-To: <1400095043-685-2-git-send-email-rahul.sharma@samsung.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Rahul, Tomasz, On 14.05.2014 21:17, Rahul Sharma wrote: > From: Tomasz Stanislawski > > Add exynos-simple-phy driver to support a single register > PHY interfaces present on Exynos4 SoC. > > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Stanislawski > Signed-off-by: Rahul Sharma > > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung-phy.txt | 56 ++++++ > drivers/phy/Kconfig | 5 + > drivers/phy/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/phy/exynos-simple-phy.c | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++ > include/dt-bindings/phy/exynos-simple-phy.h | 27 +++ > 5 files changed, 278 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 drivers/phy/exynos-simple-phy.c > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/phy/exynos-simple-phy.h > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung-phy.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung-phy.txt > index 2049261..12ad9cf 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung-phy.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung-phy.txt > @@ -161,3 +161,59 @@ Example: > usbdrdphy0 = &usb3_phy0; > usbdrdphy1 = &usb3_phy1; > }; > + > +Samsung S5P/EXYNOS SoC series SIMPLE PHY > +------------------------------------------------- > + > +Required properties: > +- compatible : should be one of the listed compatibles: > + - "samsung,exynos4210-simple-phy" > + - "samsung,exynos4412-simple-phy" > + - "samsung,exynos5250-simple-phy" > + - "samsung,exynos5420-simple-phy" > +- samsung,pmureg-phandle - handle to syscon to control PMU registers > +- #phy-cells : from the generic phy bindings, must be 1; > + > +For "samsung,exynos4210-simple-phy" compatible PHYs the second cell in > +the PHY specifier identifies the PHY and the supported phys for exynos4210 > +are: > + HDMI_PHY, > + DAC_PHY, > + ADC_PHY, > + PCIE_PHY, > + SATA_PHY. > + > +For "samsung,exynos4412-simple-phy" compatible PHYs the second cell in > +the PHY specifier identifies the PHY and the supported phys for exynos4412 > +are: > + HDMI_PHY, > + ADC_PHY. > + > +For "samsung,exynos5250-simple-phy" compatible PHYs the second cell in > +the PHY specifier identifies the PHY and the supported phys for exynos5250 > +are: > + HDMI_PHY, > + ADC_PHY, > + SATA_PHY. > + > +For "samsung,exynos5420-simple-phy" compatible PHYs the second cell in > +the PHY specifier identifies the PHY and the supported phys for exynos5420 > +are: > + HDMI_PHY, > + ADC_PHY. > + > +Example: > +Simple PHY provider node: > + > + simplephys: simple-phys@10040000 { > + compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-simple-phy"; Missing reg property or unnecessary @unit-address suffix in node name. > + samsung,pmu-syscon = <&pmu_system_controller>; > + #phy-cells = <1>; > + }; In general, the idea is quite good, but I think this should rather bind to the main PMU node, since this is just a part of the PMU, not another device in the system. This also means that the PMU node itself should be the PHY provider. Otherwise looks good. Best regards, Tomasz