On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 06:38:36PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On 14/11/2022 15:54, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 02:31:27PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >> On 11/11/2022 12:24, Johan Hovold wrote: > >>> The common registers are shared by the USB and DP parts of the PHY so > >>> drop the misleading "dp" prefix from the corresponding pointers. > >>> > >>> Note that the "DP" prefix could also be dropped from the corresponding > >>> defines, but leave that in place for now. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-combo.c | 24 +++++++++++------------ > >>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Note regarding the last phrase: I'd suggest leaving the DP prefix in > >> register names, it makes it easier to visually note & verify the > >> register block. > > > > My point is that "DP" was never part of the COM register block name. The > > confusion likely comes from the vendor driver naming these defines along > > the lines of > > > > USB3_DP_COM_POWER_DOWN_CTRL > > > > Here "USB3_DP" is the common prefix for all defines that apply to both > > "parts" of the PHY so the corresponding Linux define > > > > QPHY_V3_DP_COM_POWER_DOWN_CTRL > > > > should either include "USB3" or drop "DP". > > My thought was that we already have too many _COM_ defines in the qmp > headers. Having QPHY_Vn_COM_something would make it too easy to mix it > with QSERDES_Vn_COM_foo. Thus I'd vote to leave DP_COM prefix in place. > While it might be not fully accurate, it serves the point of identifying > the register block. I don't mind terribly and I didn't even consider trying to rename the current defines. The lack of public conclusive documentation makes structuring this mess much harder than it should have to be. That said, I don't really think that the risk of mixing up QPHY_Vn_COM_foo with QSERDES_Vn_COM_bar is something we need to worry about as you already have a separating "QSERDES" in there. Those sets of registers should be disjoint too if I remember correctly. > > This becomes more apparent on SC8280XP where the corresponding define > > is: > > > > USB43DP_COM_POWER_DOWN_CTRL > > I'd still use something like QPHY_V10_DP_COM_POWER_DOWN_CTRL here. Yeah, but then you're just making names up. ;) Johan
