On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 10:44:20AM +0900, Jaedon Shin wrote:
> Add offsets for 40nm BMIPS based set-top box platforms.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jaedon Shin <jaedon.shin@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/phy/phy-brcmstb-sata.c | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-brcmstb-sata.c b/drivers/phy/phy-brcmstb-sata.c
> index 41c7535d706b..1cc80743b1b6 100644
> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-brcmstb-sata.c
> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-brcmstb-sata.c
> @@ -30,7 +30,8 @@
> #define MAX_PORTS 2
>
> /* Register offset between PHYs in PCB space */
> -#define SATA_MDIO_REG_SPACE_SIZE 0x1000
> +#define SATA_MDIO_REG_28NM_SPACE_SIZE 0x1000
> +#define SATA_MDIO_REG_40NM_SPACE_SIZE 0x10
Hmm, I thought there were other differences than just the offsets
between ports when rev'ing from 40nm to 28nm. But revisiting the only
documentation I have [1], this looks OK. I'd recommend double checking
the other registers, even if they're currently unused though.
>
> struct brcm_sata_port {
> int portnum;
> @@ -47,7 +48,7 @@ struct brcm_sata_phy {
> struct brcm_sata_port phys[MAX_PORTS];
> };
>
> -enum sata_mdio_phy_regs_28nm {
> +enum sata_mdio_phy_regs {
> PLL_REG_BANK_0 = 0x50,
> PLL_REG_BANK_0_PLLCONTROL_0 = 0x81,
>
> @@ -85,7 +86,7 @@ static void brcm_sata_mdio_wr(void __iomem *addr, u32 bank, u32 ofs,
> #define FMAX_VAL_DEFAULT 0x3df
> #define FMAX_VAL_SSC 0x83
>
> -static void brcm_sata_cfg_ssc_28nm(struct brcm_sata_port *port)
> +static void brcm_sata_cfg_ssc(struct brcm_sata_port *port)
> {
> void __iomem *base = brcm_sata_phy_base(port);
> struct brcm_sata_phy *priv = port->phy_priv;
> @@ -116,19 +117,25 @@ static int brcm_sata_phy_init(struct phy *phy)
> {
> struct brcm_sata_port *port = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
>
> - brcm_sata_cfg_ssc_28nm(port);
> + brcm_sata_cfg_ssc(port);
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static const struct phy_ops phy_ops_28nm = {
> +static const struct phy_ops phy_ops = {
> .init = brcm_sata_phy_init,
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> };
>
> static const struct of_device_id brcm_sata_phy_of_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "brcm,bcm7445-sata-phy",
> - .data = (void *)SATA_MDIO_REG_SPACE_SIZE },
> + .data = (void *)SATA_MDIO_REG_28NM_SPACE_SIZE },
> + { .compatible = "brcm,bcm7346-sata-phy",
> + .data = (void *)SATA_MDIO_REG_40NM_SPACE_SIZE },
> + { .compatible = "brcm,bcm7360-sata-phy",
> + .data = (void *)SATA_MDIO_REG_40NM_SPACE_SIZE },
> + { .compatible = "brcm,bcm7362-sata-phy",
> + .data = (void *)SATA_MDIO_REG_40NM_SPACE_SIZE },
Like Florian suggested, this should probably be consolidated to the
first SoC that had this core on it. I think bcm7425, but I could be
wrong.
> {},
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, brcm_sata_phy_of_match);
> @@ -185,7 +192,7 @@ static int brcm_sata_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> port = &priv->phys[id];
> port->portnum = id;
> port->phy_priv = priv;
> - port->phy = devm_phy_create(dev, child, &phy_ops_28nm);
> + port->phy = devm_phy_create(dev, child, &phy_ops);
> port->ssc_en = of_property_read_bool(child, "brcm,enable-ssc");
> if (IS_ERR(port->phy)) {
> dev_err(dev, "failed to create PHY\n");
> --
> 2.6.2
>
With that:
Reviewed-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@xxxxxxxxx>
[1] https://github.com/Broadcom/stblinux-3.8/blob/master/linux/drivers/ata/sata_brcmstb_phy.c
https://github.com/Broadcom/stblinux-3.8/blob/master/linux/drivers/ata/sata_brcmstb.h
--
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
