Hi,
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:58:09AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
So maybe let's stop solving an already solved problem and just state that
you need to explicitly assign device ID to use this framework?
Felipe,
Can we have it the way I had in my v10 patch series till we find
Felipe,
ping..
On Wednesday 14 August 2013 08:35 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 14 August 2013 04:34 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Wednesday 14 of August 2013 00:19:28 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
W dniu 2013-08-13 14:05, Kishon Vijay Abraham I pisze:
On Tuesday 13 August
Hi,
On Wednesday 14 August 2013 04:34 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Wednesday 14 of August 2013 00:19:28 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
W dniu 2013-08-13 14:05, Kishon Vijay Abraham I pisze:
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 05:07 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 13 of August 2013 16:14:44 Kishon Vijay
Hi,
On Wednesday 31 July 2013 11:45 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:14:32AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
IMHO we need a lookup method for PHYs, just like for clocks,
regulators, PWMs or even i2c busses because there are complex cases
when passing just a name
On Tuesday 13 of August 2013 16:14:44 Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 31 July 2013 11:45 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:14:32AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
IMHO we need a lookup method for PHYs, just like for clocks,
regulators, PWMs
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 05:07 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 13 of August 2013 16:14:44 Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Wednesday 31 July 2013 11:45 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:14:32AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
IMHO we need a lookup method
W dniu 2013-08-13 14:05, Kishon Vijay Abraham I pisze:
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 05:07 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 13 of August 2013 16:14:44 Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
On Wednesday 31 July 2013 11:45 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:14:32AM +0530, Kishon Vijay
On Wednesday 14 of August 2013 00:19:28 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
W dniu 2013-08-13 14:05, Kishon Vijay Abraham I pisze:
On Tuesday 13 August 2013 05:07 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 13 of August 2013 16:14:44 Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
On Wednesday 31 July 2013 11:45 AM, Felipe
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:14:32AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
IMHO we need a lookup method for PHYs, just like for clocks,
regulators, PWMs or even i2c busses because there are complex cases
when passing just a name using platform data will not work. I would
second what
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 08:46:53AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 01:12:07PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Sunday 21 of July 2013 16:37:33 Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Sunday 21 July 2013 04:01 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 20 of July 2013
Hi,
On Tuesday 30 July 2013 12:41 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 08:46:53AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 01:12:07PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Sunday 21 of July 2013 16:37:33 Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Sunday 21 July 2013 04:01 PM, Tomasz Figa
On Thursday 25 July 2013, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
On Thursday 25 July 2013 12:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 23 July 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 17:14:20 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Where would you want to have those
On 07/24/2013 08:32 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 23 July 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 17:14:20 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Where would you want to have those phy_address arrays stored? There
are no board files when booting with DT.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 08:32:03PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Sorry for jumping in to the middle of the discussion, but why does a *new*
framework even bother defining an interface for board files?
Can't we just drop any interfaces for platform data passing in the phy
framework and put the
Hi Arnd,
On Wednesday 24 July 2013 20:32:03 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 23 July 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 17:14:20 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Where would you want to have those phy_address arrays stored? There
are no board
On Thursday 25 July 2013, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Wednesday 24 July 2013 20:32:03 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 23 July 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 17:14:20 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Where would you want to have those
Hi Arnd,
On Thursday 25 July 2013 13:00:49 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Thursday 25 July 2013, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Wednesday 24 July 2013 20:32:03 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 23 July 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 17:14:20 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 01:00:49PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
I'm not saying that we can't support legacy board files with the common
PHY framework, but I'd expect things to be much easier if we focus on those
platforms that are actively being worked on for now, to bring an end to the
On Tuesday 23 July 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 17:14:20 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Where would you want to have those phy_address arrays stored? There
are no board files when booting with DT. Not even saying that you
don't need to
Hi Alan,
On Monday 22 of July 2013 10:44:39 Alan Stern wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
The PHY and the controller it is attached to are both physical
devices.
The connection between them is hardwired by the system
manufacturer and cannot be
[Fixed address of devicetree mailing list and added more people on CC.]
For reference, full thread can be found under following link:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/252813
Best regards,
Tomasz
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 09:29:32 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Alan,
On Monday 22
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 09:29:32 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Alan,
Thanks for helping to clarify the issues here.
Okay. Are PHYs _always_ platform devices?
They can be i2c, spi or any other device types as well.
In those other cases, presumably
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 10:37:05 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 09:29:32 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Alan,
Thanks for helping to clarify the issues here.
Okay. Are PHYs _always_ platform devices?
They can be i2c, spi or any
Hi,
On Tuesday 23 July 2013 08:07 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 09:29:32 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Alan,
Thanks for helping to clarify the issues here.
Okay. Are PHYs _always_ platform devices?
They can be i2c, spi or any other
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:48:24PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 23 July 2013 08:07 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 09:29:32 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Alan,
Thanks for helping to clarify the issues here.
Hi Greg,
On Tuesday 23 July 2013 09:48 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:48:24PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 23 July 2013 08:07 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 09:29:32 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Alan,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 09:58:34PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi Greg,
On Tuesday 23 July 2013 09:48 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:48:24PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 23 July 2013 08:07 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013,
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 09:18:46 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:48:24PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 23 July 2013 08:07 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 09:29:32 Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:50:29PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Ick, no. Why can't you just pass the pointer to the phy itself? If you
had a priv pointer to search from, then you could have just passed the
original phy pointer in the first place, right?
IMHO it would be better if you
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:37:05AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Okay. Are PHYs _always_ platform devices?
They can be i2c, spi or any other device types as well.
In those other cases, presumably there is no platform data associated
with the PHY
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:37:11AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:50:29PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
I fully agree that a simple, single string will not scale even in some, not
so uncommon cases, but there is already a lot of existing lookup solutions
over the kernel and
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 10:37:11 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:50:29PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Ick, no. Why can't you just pass the pointer to the phy itself? If
you
had a priv pointer to search from, then you could have just passed
the
original phy pointer in
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:44:56PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:37:11AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:50:29PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
I fully agree that a simple, single string will not scale even in some,
not
so uncommon cases, but there
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 07:48:11PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 10:37:11 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:50:29PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Ick, no. Why can't you just pass the pointer to the phy itself? If
you
had a priv pointer to search from,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:01:10AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:44:56PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
What are the problems you are seeing with doing things with lookups?
You don't know the id of the device you are looking up, due to
multiple devices being in the system
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
IMHO it would be better if you provided some code example, but let's try to
check if I understood you correctly.
8
[Board file]
static struct phy my_phy;
static struct
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:31:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
You don't know the id of the device you are looking up, due to
multiple devices being in the system (dynamic ids, look back earlier in
this thread for details about that.)
I got copied in very late so don't have most of the
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 12:44:23 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:31:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
You don't know the id of the device you are looking up, due to
multiple devices being in the system (dynamic ids, look back earlier
in
this thread for details about that.)
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 15:36:00 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
IMHO it would be better if you provided some code example, but let's
try to check if I understood you correctly.
8---
-
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 11:04:14 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 07:48:11PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 10:37:11 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:50:29PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Ick, no. Why can't you just pass the pointer to the phy
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:07:52PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 12:44:23 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:31:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
You don't know the id of the device you are looking up, due to
multiple devices being in the system (dynamic ids,
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
That's what I was going to suggest too. The struct phy is defined in
the board file, which already knows about all the PHYs that exist in
the system. (Or perhaps it is allocated dynamically, so that when many
board files are present in the same
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 16:53:55 Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
That's what I was going to suggest too. The struct phy is defined
in
the board file, which already knows about all the PHYs that exist in
the system. (Or perhaps it is allocated
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 13:50:07 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:07:52PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Tuesday 23 of July 2013 12:44:23 Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:31:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
You don't know the id of the device you are looking up, due to
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote:
If you want to keep the phy struct completely separate from the board
file, there's an easy way to do it. Let's say the board file knows
about N different PHYs in the system. Then you define an array of N
pointers to phys:
struct phy
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:05:48PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
That's not so bad, as long as you let the phy core use whatever name it
wants for the device when it registers it with sysfs.
Yes, in regulator core consumer names are completely separated from this.
Regulator core simply
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:44:23PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:31:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
statement. In any case this is why the APIs doing lookups do the
lookups in the context of the requesting device - devices ask for
whatever name they use locally.
What do
Hi,
On Monday 22 July 2013 12:52 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
What's wrong with the platform_data structure, why can't that be used
for this?
At the point the platform data of some driver is initialized, e.g. in
board setup code the PHY pointer is
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:55:18PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
The issue (or one of the issues) in this discussion is that
Greg does not like the idea of using names or IDs to associate
PHYs with controllers, because they are too prone to
duplications or other
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
The PHY and the controller it is attached to are both physical
devices.
The connection between them is hardwired by the system
manufacturer and cannot be changed by software.
PHYs are generally described by
Hi,
On Monday 22 July 2013 08:34 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:55:18PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
The issue (or one of the issues) in this discussion is that
Greg does not like the idea of using names or IDs to associate
PHYs with controllers, because
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 07:59:10PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:32:26PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
That should be passed using platform data.
Ick, don't pass strings around, pass pointers. If you have platform
data you
Hi,
On Saturday 20 of July 2013 19:59:10 Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:32:26PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
That should be passed using platform data.
Ick, don't pass strings around, pass pointers. If you have
platform
data you
Hi,
On Sunday 21 July 2013 04:01 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 20 of July 2013 19:59:10 Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:32:26PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
That should be passed using platform data.
Ick, don't pass strings around, pass
On Sunday 21 of July 2013 16:37:33 Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Sunday 21 July 2013 04:01 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 20 of July 2013 19:59:10 Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:32:26PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
That
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 01:12:07PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Sunday 21 of July 2013 16:37:33 Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Sunday 21 July 2013 04:01 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 20 of July 2013 19:59:10 Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:32:26PM
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 12:22:48PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 07:59:10PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:32:26PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
That should be passed using platform data.
Ick, don't
On 07/21/2013 05:48 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 12:22:48PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 07:59:10PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:32:26PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
That should be passed using platform
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
What's wrong with the platform_data structure, why can't that be used
for this?
At the point the platform data of some driver is initialized, e.g. in
board setup code the PHY pointer is not known, since the PHY supplier
driver has not
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 08:49:32AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 20 July 2013 05:20 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:06:01PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
That should be passed using platform data.
Ick, don't pass strings around, pass pointers. If you have platform
data you can get to, then put the pointer there, don't use a name.
I don't think I understood you here :-s We wont have phy pointer
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:32:26PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
That should be passed using platform data.
Ick, don't pass strings around, pass pointers. If you have platform
data you can get to, then put the pointer there, don't use a name.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
+ ret = dev_set_name(phy-dev, %s.%d, dev_name(dev), id);
Your naming is odd, no phy
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
+ ret = dev_set_name(phy-dev, %s.%d,
On 07/19/2013 12:36 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 09:24 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 07/19/2013 12:36 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 20 July 2013 05:20 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:06:01PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM,
The PHY framework provides a set of APIs for the PHY drivers to
create/destroy a PHY and APIs for the PHY users to obtain a reference to the
PHY with or without using phandle. For dt-boot, the PHY drivers should
also register *PHY provider* with the framework.
PHY drivers should create the PHY by
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:16:10PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
+struct phy_provider *__of_phy_provider_register(struct device *dev,
+ struct module *owner, struct phy * (*of_xlate)(struct device *dev,
+ struct of_phandle_args *args));
+struct phy_provider
Hi,
On Thursday 18 July 2013 12:50 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:16:10PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
+struct phy_provider *__of_phy_provider_register(struct device *dev,
+struct module *owner, struct phy * (*of_xlate)(struct device *dev,
+struct
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 02:29:52PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Thursday 18 July 2013 12:50 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:16:10PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
+struct phy_provider *__of_phy_provider_register(struct device *dev,
+ struct module
Hi,
On Thursday 18 July 2013 09:19 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 02:29:52PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Hi,
On Thursday 18 July 2013 12:50 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:16:10PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
+struct phy_provider
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
+ret = dev_set_name(phy-dev, %s.%d, dev_name(dev), id);
Your naming is odd, no phy anywhere in it? You rely on the sender to
never send a duplicate name.id pair? Why not create your own ids based
on the
Hi,
On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
+ret = dev_set_name(phy-dev, %s.%d, dev_name(dev), id);
Your naming is odd, no phy anywhere in it? You rely on the sender to
never send a duplicate name.id
74 matches
Mail list logo
