On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi Bjorn,


On Wednesday 20 May 2015 04:11 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

quoted

On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 06:24:10PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:

quoted

On 05/04/2015 05:35 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On Monday 04 May 2015 06:12 PM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:

quoted

Add a PCIe PHY driver used by PCIe host controller driver
on Qualcomm SoCs like Snapdragon 805.

Signed-off-by: Stanimir Varbanov <redacted>
---
   drivers/phy/Kconfig         |    9 ++
   drivers/phy/Makefile        |    1 +
   drivers/phy/phy-qcom-pcie.c |  291
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Why do you need a new PHY driver for this? Why not use the existing QCOM
PHY driver. I can see the registers used here in
phy-qcom-ufs-qmp-14nm.h?

I agree that on first glance there are similarities, but I'm not sure
does the PHYs are the same IP blocks. Or at least they are different
revisions which have too many differences. So trying to combine them
will lead to more code than now.

Either way I will try to understand how many the differences are.

Ping, where are we with this?  Should I wait for something else, or are
you
convinced there's enough difference to warrant a new PHY driver, Kishon?

I'd like to wait to see if Stanimir can use existing driver instead of
creating a new driver.

OK, I'm waiting for a v3 with either tweaks to the QCOM PHY driver, or
stronger justification as to why that's impossible.  It's hard to
quantify statements like "there are similarities, but there are too
many differences," so you might have to actually attempt a patch for
the QCOM code and we can see how ugly that would turn out to be.

Thanks, Kishon.

Bjorn