Hi,
On Tuesday 04 June 2013 03:51 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
On 04/29/2013 12:03 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
The PHY framework provides a set of APIs for the PHY drivers to
create/destroy a PHY and APIs for the PHY users to obtain a reference to the
PHY with or without using phandle. For dt-boot, the PHY drivers should
also register *PHY provider* with the framework.
PHY drivers should create the PHY by passing id and ops like init, exit,
power_on and power_off. This framework is also pm runtime enabled.
The documentation for the generic PHY framework is added in
Documentation/phy.txt and the documentation for dt binding can be found at
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-bindings.txt
Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@xxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-bindings.txt | 66 +++
Documentation/phy.txt | 123 +++++
MAINTAINERS | 7 +
drivers/Kconfig | 2 +
drivers/Makefile | 2 +
drivers/phy/Kconfig | 13 +
drivers/phy/Makefile | 5 +
drivers/phy/phy-core.c | 539 ++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/phy/phy.h | 248 +++++++++
9 files changed, 1005 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-bindings.txt
create mode 100644 Documentation/phy.txt
create mode 100644 drivers/phy/Kconfig
create mode 100644 drivers/phy/Makefile
create mode 100644 drivers/phy/phy-core.c
create mode 100644 include/linux/phy/phy.h
+static inline int phy_init(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ pm_runtime_get_sync(&phy->dev);
Hmm, no need to check return value here ? Also it looks a bit unexpected to
I purposely dint check the return values in order to support platforms
that don’t enable pm_runtime.
possibly have runtime_resume callback of a PHY device called before ops->init()
call ? It seems a bit unclear what the purpose of init() callback is.
Not really. Anything that is used to initialize the PHY (internal
configuration) can go in phy_init. Usually in runtime_resume callback,
optional functional clocks are enabled and also in some cases context
restore is done. So it really makes sense to enable clocks/module
(pm_runtime_get_sync) before doing a PHY configuration (phy_init).
+ if (phy->ops->init)
+ return phy->ops->init(phy);
+
+ return -EINVAL;
+}
+
+static inline int phy_exit(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+ if (phy->ops->exit)
+ ret = phy->ops->exit(phy);
+
+ pm_runtime_put_sync(&phy->dev);
+
+ return ret;
+}
Do phy_init/phy_exit need to be mandatory ? What if there is really
No. phy_init/phy_exit is not mandatory at all.
nothing to do in those callbacks ? Perhaps -ENOIOCTLCMD should be
returned if a callback is not implemented, so PHY users can recognize
such situation and proceed ?
So currently these APIs return -EINVAL if these callbacks are not
populated which is good enough IMHO.
+static inline int phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ if (phy->ops->power_on)
+ return phy->ops->power_on(phy);
+
+ return -EINVAL;
+}
+
+static inline int phy_power_off(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ if (phy->ops->power_off)
+ return phy->ops->power_off(phy);
+
+ return -EINVAL;
+}
+
+static inline int phy_pm_runtime_get(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ if (WARN(IS_ERR(phy), "Invalid PHY reference\n"))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return pm_runtime_get(&phy->dev);
+}
+
+static inline int phy_pm_runtime_get_sync(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ if (WARN(IS_ERR(phy), "Invalid PHY reference\n"))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return pm_runtime_get_sync(&phy->dev);
+}
+
+static inline int phy_pm_runtime_put(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ if (WARN(IS_ERR(phy), "Invalid PHY reference\n"))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return pm_runtime_put(&phy->dev);
+}
+
+static inline int phy_pm_runtime_put_sync(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ if (WARN(IS_ERR(phy), "Invalid PHY reference\n"))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return pm_runtime_put_sync(&phy->dev);
+}
+
+static inline void phy_pm_runtime_allow(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ if (WARN(IS_ERR(phy), "Invalid PHY reference\n"))
+ return;
+
+ pm_runtime_allow(&phy->dev);
+}
+
+static inline void phy_pm_runtime_forbid(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ if (WARN(IS_ERR(phy), "Invalid PHY reference\n"))
+ return;
+
+ pm_runtime_forbid(&phy->dev);
+}
Do we need to have all these runtime PM wrappers ? I guess you
intended to avoid referencing phy->dev from the PHY consumers ?
Yeah.. I dint want pm_runtime of phy core device to be called from PHY
consumers.
Thanks
Kishon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
