On 09/02/2015 02:25 PM, santosh shilimkar wrote:
9/2/2015 10:58 AM, Murali Karicheri wrote:
On 09/02/2015 01:24 PM, santosh shilimkar wrote:
On 9/2/2015 9:35 AM, Murali Karicheri wrote:
Santosh,
---Cut-------------------
I suspected the same. I know back then we started with SERDES code
with NETCP but as you already know, its a separate block which
is needed for NIC card to work. Its more of phy and hence its
having different address space is not surprising.
Using Phy interface is not acceptable to the subsystem maintainer based
on the communication I had on this. Also the Phy here is tighly coupled
with the hardware block it is working with. So this model is not right
for SerDes driver as it require additional enhancements as described
below if needs to be used.
Thanks for update on that.
The serdes initialization procedure requires checking the status in the
hardware block (PCIe, 1G or 10G) and then taking corrective action.
This
means a Phy driver would require mapping of related hw address space
(PCIe, 1G and 10G) as well which is already mapped by the hardware
driver(PCIe, 1G and 10G). One solution is to treat this as a libray
function that can be called from the respective hardware device driver.
A device node of h/w device (PCIe or 1G) in such as looks like
Or SerDes driver can embed the status reg address space.
This is read only access so should be fine.
pcie {
serdes@someaddress {
reg = <address of serdes>;
}
}
hw driver will call ks2_serdes_init(node, hw_base_address) to
initialize
the serdes. Other APIs can be added to enable/disable lane or shutdown
etc. The libary will be added to drivers/soc/ti/ and used by various
device drivers to initialize and use the phy. As the serdes is slightly
integrated with the hardware block, IMO, this is a better approach than
using the phy model. The API definitions will be added to
include/linux/soc/ti/ folder.
Serdes Driver with its status register address space might solve this
sharing problem. Library might work but we should try to have driver
considering there is a physical device. I don't have strong opinion
on drivers vs library.
In addition to checking status in the SerDes, it needs to also check the
status of the associated hardware block (PCIe, 1G, 10G etc). So this
means, same needs to be mapped twice, first by the above hardware device
drivers and then by the serdes driver which causes problem. My point is
since they both are tightly coupled, a libary is a better option. That
way the mapped address can be passed to the serdes API to perform the
required task, instead of using Phy API which doesn't allow us to do the
same. If SerDes h/w can be brought up independently, the Phy model fits
well.
As I said, I don't have strong preference and fine with library approach.
I suggest you do a RFC to take this further. Include Arnd on CC for
that.
Sure!
Murali
Regards,
Santosh
--
Murali Karicheri
Linux Kernel, Keystone
--
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
