[PATCH 1/9] phy: samsung: Add Exynos USB DRD PHY driver
Mattijs Korpershoek
mkorpershoek at kernel.org
Mon Jul 21 11:26:37 CEST 2025
On Sun, Jul 20, 2025 at 14:57, Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko at linaro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 1:58 AM Mattijs Korpershoek
> <mkorpershoek at kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sam,
>>
>> Thank you for the patch.
>>
>
> [snip]
>
>> > +
>> > +#define EXYNOS850_DRD_UTMI 0x50
>> > +#define UTMI_FORCE_SLEEP BIT(0)
>> > +#define UTMI_FORCE_SUSPEND BIT(1)
>> > +#define UTMI_DM_PULLDOWN BIT(2)
>> > +#define UTMI_DP_PULLDOWN BIT(3)
>> > +#define UTMI_FORCE_BVALID BIT(4)
>> > +#define UTMI_FORCE_VBUSVALID BIT(5)
>>
>> Comparing with the linux driver using
>> commit cc52a697f87e ("phy: exynos5-usbdrd: support Exynos USBDRD 3.2 4nm controller")
>>
>> I notice that the defines are in reverse order (from 0 to 5 and linux
>> has from 5 to 0).
>>
>> Is there any particular reason for this?
>> I don't mind it too much but it makes diffing between linux and U-Boot a
>> bit harder.
>>
>> Anyway, I've compared this with the linux driver and it looks good to
>> me!
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Mattijs Korpershoek <mkorpershoek at kernel.org>
>>
>
> Thank for reviewing this, Mattijs! Yeah, I kinda flipped the register
> bits w.r.t. kernel's version, just because it looks better to me this
> way (easier to read when it's sorted properly). Due to the driver
> model API differences between kernel and U-Boot I had to rework the
> whole structure of the driver, and I only added Exynos850 support for
> now, so the difference between U-Boot and kernel versions is quite big
> as it is anyway, so I figured it's not a big deal to reorder things
> even more. Hope it's ok with you?
It's ok with me. I was just curious if there was any special reason for
re-ordering. I agree that it's easier to read with the sorting you have
applied.
I've noticed that only Exynos850 is supported for now. That's fine as
well in my opinion!
Feel free to pick this up through your tree.
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list