Hi, On Wednesday 17 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 05:17:29PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> +menuconfig GENERIC_PHY >> + tristate "PHY Subsystem" >> + help >> + Generic PHY support. >> + >> + This framework is designed to provide a generic interface for PHY >> + devices present in the kernel. This layer will have the generic >> + API by which phy drivers can create PHY using the phy framework and >> + phy users can obtain reference to the PHY. > > Shouldn't this be something that other drivers select? How will anyone > know if they need this or not? All the PHY drivers should go here. So only if *GENERIC_PHY* is enabled those PHY drivers can be selected like in [1]. The PHY consumer driver should ideally use *depends on* in their Kconfig. [1] -> http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20130628.134308.4a8f7668.ca.html > >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,544 @@ >> +/* >> + * phy-core.c -- Generic Phy framework. >> + * >> + * Copyright (C) 2013 Texas Instruments >> + * >> + * Author: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@xxxxxx> >> + * >> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it >> + * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the >> + * Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your >> + * option) any later version. > > You really mean "any later version" (I have to ask)? That was copied from somewhere :-s > >> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, >> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of >> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the >> + * GNU General Public License for more details. >> + * >> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License >> + * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. > > Are these two paragraphs needed? This isn't a "program", and they got a > copy of the GPL already with the kernel. hmm.. I can remove that. > >> +static struct class *phy_class; > > Why do you need a class? Wanted to group all the PHY drivers to be used by different subsystems (SATA/USB/PCIE/HDMI/VIDEO) into a single entity. There were some comments in my initial version [3] on using a bus_type instead of class but then it was decided to go with class itself. [3] -> http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1302.2/01389.html > > When modifying/adding new sysfs stuff, you need a Documentation/ABI/ > entry as well. I'm not actually adding any new sysfs entry other than what a *class_create* must have created. Do I need to add one for that? Thanks Kishon -- 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
