[PATCHv2 1/3] phy: Add exynos-simple-phy driver
t.stanislaws at samsung.com
Wed May 7 06:36:53 PDT 2014
On 05/07/2014 12:38 PM, Rahul Sharma wrote:
> On 5 May 2014 15:14, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon at ti.com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 09 April 2014 03:31 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
>>> On 09/04/14 11:12, Rahul Sharma wrote:
>>>> Idea looks good. How about keeping compatible which is independent
>>>> of SoC, something like "samsung,exynos-simple-phy" and provide Reg
>>>> and Bit through phy provider node. This way we can avoid SoC specific
>>>> hardcoding in phy driver and don't need to look into dt bindings for
>>>> each new SoC.
>>> I believe it is a not recommended approach.
>> Why not? We should try to avoid hard coding in the driver code. Moreover by
>> avoiding hardcoding we can make it a generic driver for single bit PHYs.
> @Tomasz, any plans to consider this approach for simple phy driver?
> Rahul Sharma.
Initially, I wanted to make a very generic driver and to add bit and
register (or its offset) attribute to the PHY node.
However, there was a very strong opposition from DT maintainers
to adding any bit related configuration to DT.
The current solution was designed to be a trade-off between
being generic and being accepted :).
More information about the dri-devel