Hi, On 3/3/2016 12:04 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 03 March 2016 11:39:05 Joao Pinto wrote: >> Hi Arnd, >> >> On 3/2/2016 7:55 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> On Wednesday 02 March 2016 16:46:47 Joao Pinto wrote: >>>> On 2/19/2016 3:03 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>>> On Thursday 18 February 2016 17:20:27 Joao Pinto wrote: >> >> Facts: >> >> - Test Chip type are currently not detectable in runtime through the controller >> - In the future the Test Chip version will be available in the controller >> - Test Chip initialization is different for each type >> - The IP Core version is 1.40a >> - Test Chip version is 6.00 >> - Teh UFS version is 2.0 > > Ok. > >> Suggested driver architecture: >> >> Platform setup: >> tc-dwc-g210-pltfrm --> tc-dwc-g210 --> ufshcd-dwc-pltfrm --> ufshcd-dwc --> ufs >> >> The test chip platform driver could be called through 2 compatibility strings. >> indicating the chip's version and bit type: >> "snps, g210-tc-6.00-20bit" >> "snps, g210-tc-6.00-40bit" > > Yes, this sounds good. We can probably skip one of the middle layers, > but basically that is what I was looking for. > >> The device tree node would have additional info compatibility strings as the DWC >> IP core version and UFS version: >> "snps, dwc-ufshcd-1.40a" >> "jedec, ufs-2.0" >> >> PCI based setup: >> tc-dwc-g210-pci --> tc-dwc-g210 --> ufshcd-dwc-pci --> ufshcd-dwc --> ufs > > The tc-dwc-g210 portion probably shouldn't depend on both > ufshcd-dwc-pltfrm and ufshcd-dwc-pci here, so how about leaving > those two out? > > > Then it becomes > > tc-dwc-g210-pci ---> tc-dwc-g210 --> ufshcd-dwc --> ufs > tc-dwc-g210-pltfrm --/ Ok, understood. It becomes simpler without the pltfm and pci "middle layer". > >> The test chip type would be configured by a parameter to be passed in the kernel >> boot args: tc_type = 20 (20-bit) or tc_type = 40 (40-bit) > > Right. With module_param() helper, this will be either a boot command > line option, or a module load option, depending on whether the driver > is built-on or not. > > modprobe tc-dwc-g210-pci tc_type=20 > > command line: tc-dwc-g210-pci.tc_type=20 > Right, that was the idea. >> Having this in mind the KConfig would be: >> >> "config SCSI_UFS_DWC_HOOKS >> bool > > I think we can now remove the config option for the hooks as well. > >> config SCSI_UFS_DWC_PLAT >> tristate "DesignWare UFS controller platform glue driver" >> depends on SCSI_UFSHCD_PLATFORM >> select SCSI_UFS_DWC_HOOKS >> help >> This selects the DesignWare UFS host controller platform glue driver. >> >> Select this if you have a DesignWare UFS controller on Platform bus. >> If unsure, say N. >> >> config SCSI_UFS_DWC_PCI >> tristate "DesignWare UFS controller pci glue driver" >> depends on SCSI_UFSHCD_PCI >> select SCSI_UFS_DWC_HOOKS >> help >> This selects the DesignWare UFS host controller pci glue driver. >> >> Select this if you have a DesignWare UFS controller on pci bus. >> If unsure, say N. >> >> config SCSI_UFS_DWC_TC >> bool "Support for the Synopsys Test Chip" >> depends on SCSI_UFS_DWC_HOOKS && (SCSI_UFSHCD_PCI || SCSI_UFS_DWC_PLAT) >> ---help--- >> Synopsys Test Chip is a Phy for prototyping purposes. >> This selects the support for the Synopsys Test Chip. >> >> Select this if you have a Synopsys Test Chip. >> If unsure, say N." >> >> Agree with the approach? > > This would work, but I think it's better to define the options in terms > of the top-level drivers, i.e. SCSI_UFS_DWC_TC_PCI and SCSI_UFS_DWC_TC_PLATFORM, > and then make the other options hidden and implicitly turned out by them. > config SCSI_UFS_DWC bool config SCSI_UFS_DWC_TC_PLATFORM tristate "DesignWare platform support using a G210 Test Chip" depends on SCSI_UFSHCD_PLATFORM select SCSI_UFS_DWC ---help--- Synopsys Test Chip is a PHY for prototyping purposes. If unsure, say N." config SCSI_UFS_DWC_TC_PCI tristate "DesignWare pci support using a G210 Test Chip" depends on SCSI_UFSHCD_PCI select SCSI_UFS_DWC ---help--- Synopsys Test Chip is a PHY for prototyping purposes. If unsure, say N." I would keep SCSI_UFS_DWC to avoid building DWC specific source everytime. Agree? > Arnd > Joao -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
