On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 09:13:38AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: <snip> > > > > +- qcom,init-seq: > > > > + Value type: <u32 array> > > > > + Definition: Should contain a sequence of <offset value delay> tuples to > > > > + program 'value' into phy register at 'offset' with 'delay' > > > > + in us afterwards. > > > > > > If we wanted this type of thing in DT, we'd have a generic binding (or > > > forth). > > > > Right now, this is a qualcomm usb phy specific bindings - first used in > > qcom,usb-hs-phy.txt and I extended it a bit for my phy. As this is not > > a so good hardware description, I'm a little hesitated to make it > > generic for other platforms to use in general. What about we put off it > > a little bit until we see more platforms need the same thing? > > I'm not saying I want it generic. Quite the opposite. I don't think we > should have it either generically or vendor specific. The main thing I > have a problem with is the timing information because then we're more > that just data. Without that we're talking about a bunch of properties > for register fields or just raw register values in DT. That becomes > more of a judgement call. There's not too much value in making a > driver translate a bunch of properties just to stuff them into > registers on init. But then just allowing any raw register value to be > in DT could be easily abused. Rob, I agree with your comments. Honestly, I'm not comfortable with this 'qcom,init-seq' thing in the first impression. The similar existence in mainline qcom,usb-hs-phy.txt makes me think it might be acceptable with the timing data added. Okay, I know your position on this now. @Sriharsha, Seeing that 'qcom,init-seq' is being configured with the exactly same values for both HS phys in SoC level dts file (qcs404.dtsi), I think such settings can be moved into driver code as SoC specific data. Unless you have a different view on this, I will do it with v4. Shawn
