On 12-07-22, 15:12, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 11:55:23AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 29-06-22, 00:04, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > > > The exynos-pcie driver called phy_power_on() and then phy_init() for some > > > historical reasons. However the generic PHY framework assumes that the > > > proper sequence is to call phy_init() first, then phy_power_on(). The > > > operations done by both functions should be considered as one action and > > > as such they are called by the exynos-pcie driver (without doing anything > > > between them). The initialization is just a sequence of register writes, > > > which cannot be altered, without breaking the hardware operation. > > > > > > To match the generic PHY framework requirement, simply move all register > > > writes to the phy_init()/phy_exit() and drop power_on()/power_off() > > > callbacks. This way the driver will also work with the old (incorrect) > > > PHY initialization call sequence. > > > > Is the plan to merge thru pcie tree? > > I guess these patches should go together. I don't see any major > exynos series pending, but I do have two minor pci-exynos.c patches in > the queue. > > If you ack it (after resolution of your question below) I'd be happy > to take both if it doesn't cause trouble for you. Done now. -- ~Vinod
