Hi again, On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 02:02:43PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Heikki Krogerus > <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:08:04PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Heikki Krogerus > >> > 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. > > > > OK, sorry I was not clear on this. I'm thinking the same, that this is > > something that is called later, for example when the controller is > > ready. Some ULPI phys need to be initialized, but since the controller > > provides the interface, it's usually not possible during init time. > > This hook could be used in that case as well. > > > > All I'm saying is that "tune" is a poor expression. You will need to > > add a comment explaining what the hook does in any case, so you'll > > have something like "this is something that is called when the > > controller is ready" or something similar. That will make it clear > > what it's meant for. > > Ok, i think i should have kept a comment atleast :-( > I will add proper comments above, and as suggested in the mail by > Kishon, may be name it calibrate ? > What do you think ? Sure, I'm fine with that. Thanks, -- heikki -- 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
