On 03/11/2013 01:01 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:33:48AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 03/08/2013 12:08 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 01:37:17PM -0700, Stephen Warren >>> wrote: >>>> On 03/07/2013 08:45 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>>>> this will make sure that we have sensible names for all >>>>> phy drivers. Current situation was already quite bad with >>>>> too generic names being used. >>>> >>>> Is phy-$name specific enough? There are other types of PHY >>>> such as Ethernet, etc. What about phy-usb-$name? >>> >>> we will be creating a generic (kernel-wide) phy layer, so I >>> guess that matters very little. Specially since we don't want >>> to be differentiating PHYs by their subsystem and rather by the >>> IP name (which means phy-tegra, phy-samsung, phy-omap, are all >>> 'wrong', but there were no better names). >> >> On other thought here: The Tegra PHY in question here very >> specifically is a USB PHY. There's no way it could be used as >> e.g. a SATA PHY, either as a HW block or given the driver code >> that program is. Is sharing a PHY IP block or driver ever >> possible for any HW? > > yes it is possible, and OMAP5 shares the same IP for USB3 and SATA. > PHYs don't know about USB, SATA, Ethernet and whatnot. PHYs know > solely about the physical layer. Their work is just to generate the > proper electrical signals. Hmm. Is the current code in drivers/usb/phy/tegra_usb_phy.c not really a PHY driver, then? Tegra's USB PHY HW module definitely does know that it's specifically a USB PHY. It has direct knowledge of UTMI/ULPI/... Instead, should the code be part of the EHCI driver, since the concept of a PHY known to drivers/usb/phy doesn't seem related to what the Tegra PHY HW actually is? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
