[PATCH 3/6] DRIVERS: ATA: SATA PHY utility framework
Tomasz Figa
tomasz.figa at gmail.com
Fri Oct 12 18:30:17 EDT 2012
Hi Vasanth,
On Tuesday 09 of October 2012 17:18:49 Vasanth Ananthan wrote:
> This patch adds SATA PHY utility framework APIs. The framework acts as
> an interface between the SATA device and the PHY device. The SATA PHY
> device registers itself with the framework through the APIs provided
> and the SATA device finds and requests for an appropriate PHY device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vasanth Ananthan <vasanth.a at samsung.com>
> ---
> drivers/ata/Kconfig | 9 ++++
> drivers/ata/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/ata/sata_phy.c | 99
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/ata/sata_phy.h
> | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 153 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 drivers/ata/sata_phy.c
> create mode 100644 drivers/ata/sata_phy.h
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/Kconfig b/drivers/ata/Kconfig
> index 27cecd3..0344b78 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/ata/Kconfig
> @@ -83,6 +83,15 @@ config SATA_AHCI_PLATFORM
>
> If unsure, say N.
>
> +config SATA_EXYNOS
> + bool "Exynos SATA AHCI support"
> + depends on I2C_S3C2410
> + help
> + This option enables support for Exynos AHCI Serial ATA
> + controllers.
> +
> + If unsure, say N.
> +
> config SATA_FSL
> tristate "Freescale 3.0Gbps SATA support"
> depends on FSL_SOC
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/Makefile b/drivers/ata/Makefile
> index a454a13..bf3fd91 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/ata/Makefile
> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_FSL) += sata_fsl.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_INIC162X) += sata_inic162x.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_SIL24) += sata_sil24.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_DWC) += sata_dwc_460ex.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_SATA_EXYNOS) += sata_phy.o libahci.o
If the framework introduced by this patch is supposed to be generic, maybe
a new Kconfig entry should be created for it, like CONFIG_SATA_PHY, which
would be selected by any drivers using it?
>
> # SFF w/ custom DMA
> obj-$(CONFIG_PDC_ADMA) += pdc_adma.o
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_phy.c b/drivers/ata/sata_phy.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..dbb4aa3
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_phy.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2010-2012 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
> + * http://www.samsung.com
> + *
> + * EXYNOS - SATA utility framework.
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as +
> * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> +*/
> +
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/export.h>
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/device.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/list.h>
> +#include "sata_phy.h"
> +
> +static LIST_HEAD(phy_list);
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(phy_lock);
> +
> +struct sata_phy *sata_get_phy(enum sata_phy_type type)
> +{
> + struct sata_phy *x = NULL;
> + unsigned long flag;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&phy_lock, flag);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(x, &phy_list, head) {
> + if (x->type == type) {
> + get_device(x->dev);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&phy_lock, flag);
> + return x;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(sata_get_phy);
> +
> +int sata_add_phy(struct sata_phy *phy, enum sata_phy_type type)
> +{
> + unsigned long flag;
> + unsigned int ret = -EINVAL;
> + struct sata_phy *x;
If you need to handle the situation when phy is NULL here, then why not
to:
if (!phy)
return -EINVAL;
and then make the code below unconditional?
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&phy_lock, flag);
> +
> + if (phy) {
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(x, &phy_list, head) {
> + if (x->type == type) {
> + dev_err(phy->dev, "transceiver type already
exists\n");
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
> + phy->type = type;
> + list_add_tail(&phy->head, &phy_list);
> + ret = 0;
> + }
> +
> + out:
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&phy_lock, flag);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(sata_add_phy);
> +
> +void sata_remove_phy(struct sata_phy *phy)
> +{
> + unsigned long flag;
> + struct sata_phy *x;
Same here.
Best regards,
Tomasz Figa
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list