Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759222Ab3GSF4a (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 01:56:30 -0400 Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:41851 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751035Ab3GSF41 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 01:56:27 -0400 Message-ID: <51E8D4E0.8060200@ti.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 11:25:44 +0530 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] drivers: phy: add generic PHY framework References: <1374129984-765-1-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <1374129984-765-2-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <20130718072004.GA16720@kroah.com> <51E7AE88.3050007@ti.com> <20130718154954.GA31961@kroah.com> <51E8D086.809@ti.com> <20130719054311.GA14638@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20130719054311.GA14638@kroah.com> 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 Content-Length: 2427 Lines: 51 Hi, On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>>>> + ret = dev_set_name(&phy->dev, "%s.%d", dev_name(dev), id); >>>>> >>>>> Your naming is odd, no "phy" anywhere in it? You rely on the sender to >>>>> never send a duplicate name.id pair? Why not create your own ids based >>>>> on the number of phys in the system, like almost all other classes and >>>>> subsystems do? >>>> >>>> hmm.. some PHY drivers use the id they provide to perform some of their >>>> internal operation as in [1] (This is used only if a single PHY provider >>>> implements multiple PHYS). Probably I'll add an option like PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO >>>> to give the PHY drivers an option to use auto id. >>>> >>>> [1] -> >>>> http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20130628.134308.4a8f7668.ca.html >>> >>> No, who cares about the id? No one outside of the phy core ever should, >>> because you pass back the only pointer that they really do care about, >>> if they need to do anything with the device. Use that, and then you can >> >> hmm.. ok. >> >>> rip out all of the "search for a phy by a string" logic, as that's not >> >> Actually this is needed for non-dt boot case. In the case of dt boot, we use a >> phandle by which the controller can get a reference to the phy. But in the case >> of non-dt boot, the controller can get a reference to the phy only by label. > > I don't understand. They registered the phy, and got back a pointer to > it. Why can't they save it in their local structure to use it again > later if needed? They should never have to "ask" for the device, as the One is a *PHY provider* driver which is a driver for some PHY device. This will use phy_create to create the phy. The other is a *PHY consumer* driver which might be any controller driver (can be USB/SATA/PCIE). The PHY consumer will use phy_get to get a reference to the phy (by *phandle* in the case of dt boot and *label* in the case of non-dt boot). > device id might be unknown if there are multiple devices in the system. I agree with you on the device id part. That need not be known to the PHY driver. Thanks Kishon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/