Hi Koshon,

On 2017-08-08 17:39, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

On Friday 04 August 2017 12:18 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
Refactoring the qcom-ufs phy and host controller code to move
further towards the generic phy usage. Right now the qcom-ufs exports
a bunch of APIs that are used by the host controller to initialize
the phy.
With this patch series, we populate the phy_init() which was a no-op
earlier. The host controller then calls the phy_init() at the designated
place rather than doing it invariably in ufs_hcd_init().

As part of this series, we introduce phy modes for ufs phy.
The M-PHY has two data rates defined for each generations (Gears) -
Rate A and Rate B. These can serve as the two modes of ufs HS phy.
Host controller can direct the phy to set the respective configurations
based on the phy modes.

The patch-series has been tested with necessary dt patches on db820c.

Can the first 3 patches go independently of the other 2 or should all this be
merged together?

The first 3 patches are independent, but the next 2 patches depend on those 3 for functionality. I would prefer all to go in one tree. If you want to pull these in the phy tree,
I will request Subhash/Martin to ack the patches.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to