On 16/02/2025 10:51, Ivaylo Ivanov wrote: >> >>>> You need to >>>> integrate the changes, not create duplicated driver. >>> I can do that, but it would be come a bit cluttered, won't it? Depends on >>> if we want to follow the current oem-provided initialization sequence, or >>> try and fully reuse what we have in there. >> >> I think it duplicates a lot, so it won't be clutter. We have many >> drivers having common code and per-variant ops. > > So the approach to take here is to make a common driver? For example: one common module and two modules per each soc, because I assume some per-soc stuff might be needed. But maybe even these two modules are not necessary and everything could be in one driver. > > What about the current modelling scheme, as-in taking the phandle to > the usbcon phy and handling it? What about it? Did you look at the bindings of qcom snps eusb2? Are you saying you do not have here repeater? If so, then this phy phandle might not be correct. Best regards, Krzysztof
