On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 02:33:40PM +0100, Peter Griffin wrote:
> Hi Felipe,
>
> Thanks for reviewing, see my comments below: -
>
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> > > + dwc3: dwc3@9900000 {
> > > + compatible = "snps,dwc3";
> > > + reg = <0x09900000 0x100000>;
> > > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 155 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>;
> > > + dr_mode = "host"
> > > + usb-phy = <&usb3_phy>;
> > > + phy-names = "usb2-phy";
> > > + phys = <&usb2_picophy2>;
> >
> > why are you using different binding for usb2 and usb3 phys ? Why can't
> > you just:
> >
> > phys-names = "usb2-phy", "usb3-phy";
> > phys = <&usb2_picophy2>, <&usb3_phy>;
> >
> > ??
>
> Currently (in the vendor tree) one of the phys lives in
> drivers/usb/phy and the other in drivers/phy.
> I believe that is because one is only a usb phy and the other is a
> multi function phy which can drive PCI-E or USB3.
right, but for mainline, we can have both PHYs in drivers/phy only.
> So to make that work, when dwc3/core.c gets the PHYS in
> dwc3_core_get_phy() we need to use the different bindings.
>
> I think we are the only platform using "one of each", but luckily
> dwc3_core_get_phy() has been written generically enough that it "just
> works" :-).
true, but I want to drop support for the legacy drivers/usb/phy layer
from dwc3. I'll try to move all PHYs to drivers/phy for v3.18.
cheers
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
