Hi,
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Heikki Krogerus
<heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
Thanks for reviewing this.
>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 04:25:23PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>> Some PHY controllers may need to tune PHY post-initialization,
>> so that the PHY consumers can call phy-tuning at appropriate
>> point of time.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/phy/phy-core.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/phy/phy.h | 7 +++++++
>> 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-core.c b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> index 03cf8fb..68dbb90 100644
>> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> @@ -239,6 +239,26 @@ out:
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_power_off);
>>
>> +int phy_tune(struct phy *phy)
>> +{
>> + int ret = -ENOTSUPP;
>> +
>> + mutex_lock(&phy->mutex);
>> + if (phy->ops->tune) {
>> + ret = phy->ops->tune(phy);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>> + dev_err(&phy->dev, "phy tuning failed --> %d\n", ret);
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> +out:
>> + mutex_unlock(&phy->mutex);
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_tune);
>
> I think "setup" instead of "tune" is much more clear and reusable.
I think "setup" will look more like first time setting up the phy,
which is rather served by "init" callback.
This i thought would serve the purpose of over-riding certain PHY
parameters, which would not have been
possible at "init" time.
Please correct my thinking if i am unable to understand your point here.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> heikki
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Best Regards
Vivek Gautam
Samsung R&D Institute, Bangalore
India
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
