On Wednesday 11 March 2015 14:37:58 Arun Ramamurthy wrote:

On 15-03-10 01:27 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

On Wednesday 25 February 2015 16:24:06 Arun Ramamurthy wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

Should I run this by Alan Stern?

I've added him to Cc here. He clearly didn't know the background about
the DT binding change, and should not need to, but he may have an opinion
on what names we should use.

Arnd, should I re patch the ehci-platform driver to avoid phy-names
entirely? Alan, if not do you have an opinion on what the usb phy names
should be? The current patch uses "usbp" + port number such as "usbp0" ,
"usbp1" etc

I think avoiding the phy names would be best here, but it requires a
kernel API change first, because we do not have a way to get a phy
by index as we do for other subsystems (e.g. clocks or gpios).

Arnd , there is an existing api _of_phy_get that gets a phy by index. 
However it is not exported and is called from of_phy_get which is in 
turn called from devm_of_phy_get.

My plan is to create a new function maybe devm_of_phy_get_by_index that 
calls _of_phy_get directly? What are your thoughts?

Sounds good to me.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html