Hi Tomasz,
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Vasanth,
>
> On Tuesday 09 of October 2012 17:18:49 Vasanth Ananthan wrote:
>> This patch adds SATA PHY utility framework APIs. The framework acts as
>> an interface between the SATA device and the PHY device. The SATA PHY
>> device registers itself with the framework through the APIs provided
>> and the SATA device finds and requests for an appropriate PHY device.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vasanth Ananthan <vasanth.a@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/ata/Kconfig | 9 ++++
>> drivers/ata/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/ata/sata_phy.c | 99
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/ata/sata_phy.h
>> | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> 4 files changed, 153 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 drivers/ata/sata_phy.c
>> create mode 100644 drivers/ata/sata_phy.h
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/Kconfig b/drivers/ata/Kconfig
>> index 27cecd3..0344b78 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/Kconfig
>> @@ -83,6 +83,15 @@ config SATA_AHCI_PLATFORM
>>
>> If unsure, say N.
>>
>> +config SATA_EXYNOS
>> + bool "Exynos SATA AHCI support"
>> + depends on I2C_S3C2410
>> + help
>> + This option enables support for Exynos AHCI Serial ATA
>> + controllers.
>> +
>> + If unsure, say N.
>> +
>> config SATA_FSL
>> tristate "Freescale 3.0Gbps SATA support"
>> depends on FSL_SOC
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/Makefile b/drivers/ata/Makefile
>> index a454a13..bf3fd91 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/Makefile
>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_FSL) += sata_fsl.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_INIC162X) += sata_inic162x.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_SIL24) += sata_sil24.o
>> obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_DWC) += sata_dwc_460ex.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_EXYNOS) += sata_phy.o libahci.o
>
>
> If the framework introduced by this patch is supposed to be generic, maybe
> a new Kconfig entry should be created for it, like CONFIG_SATA_PHY, which
> would be selected by any drivers using it?
>
>> +int sata_add_phy(struct sata_phy *phy, enum sata_phy_type type)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long flag;
>> + unsigned int ret = -EINVAL;
>> + struct sata_phy *x;
>
> If you need to handle the situation when phy is NULL here, then why not
> to:
>
> if (!phy)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> and then make the code below unconditional?
>
I'll incorporate the suggestions.
--
Vasanth
--
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
