[PATCH v1 1/3] dt-bindings: phy: Add i.MX8QM PCIe PHY binding

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 30/08/2023 09:31, Hongxing Zhu wrote:
>>
>>> +    description: |
>>> +      Specifies the different usecases supported by the HSIO(High
>>> + Speed IO)
>>
>> I don't know what are the usecases...
> Sorry, miss one space between "use" and "cases".

I did not mean language typo, but in general - what are you describing here?

> i.MX8QM HSIO module can be controlled by DSC/software in these three
>  different modes. So I add this property (fsl,hsio-cfg) here to specify the
>  work mode of HSIO.

So modes of work? Or different device attached to the PHY? Or what?
There is no use case in hardware and you should describe hardware.

>>
>>> +      module. PCIEAX2SATA means two lanes PCIea and a single lane SATA.
>>> +      PCIEAX1PCIEBX1SATA represents a single lane PCIea, a single lane
>>> +      PCIeb and a single lane SATA. PCIEAX2PCIEBX1 on behalf of a two
>>> +      lanes PCIea, a single lane PCIeb.
>>> +      Refer include/dt-bindings/phy/phy-imx8-pcie.h for the constants to
>>> +      be used (optional).
>>
>> None of all this helped me to understand what part of hardware this is responsible
>> for. It seems you just want to program a register, but instead you should use one
>> of existing properties like phy-modes etc.
> It's my bad. Didn't describe the HW clearly above.
> The fsl,hsio-cfg is used to specify the work mode of HSIO subsystem, not only
>  the PHY mode. Since the PHYs are contained in the HSIO subsystem, can't be
> used by PCIe or SATA controller freely. The usage of these PHYs are limited
>  by the HSIO work modes. BTW, up to now, I still don't have a good idea to
>  describe the HSIO by phy-modes property although I prefer this way in my mind.

What is HSIO and why does it appear in context of this phy?
Specifically, if this is separate subsystem, why do you put HSIO
property in the phy? No, that does not seem right.

>>
>>> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>>> +    enum: [ 1, 2, 3 ]
>>> +
>>> +  ctrl-csr:
>>> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
>>> +    description:
>>> +      phandle to the ctrl-csr region containing the HSIO control and
>>> +      status registers for PCIe or SATA controller (optional).
>>
>> Please try some internal review before posting to patches. Community is not cheap
>> reviewers taking this duty from NXP. I am pretty sure NXP can afford someone
>> looking at the code.
>>
>> This misses vendor prefix, as explained many times for every syscon phandle. Also
>> optional is redundant.
> Sorry about the missing prefix. The prefix would be added later.
> And the optional would be removed. Thanks.
>>
>> But anyway status of PCIe or SATA controller is not a property of the phy, so it
>> looks to me you stuff here some properties belonging to some other missing
>> devices.
> I see. You're right the status of PCIe or SATA controller is not a property
>  of the PHY. Some bits contained in the ctrl-csr region, are used to kick
> off resets through the internal glue logic. So, this property is added
>  for phy driver.

Sorry, I am really fed up with the syscons. See here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230830031846.127957-2-william.qiu@starfivetech.com/

I cannot trust you on this anymore. Describe hardware properly. If you
have resets, you have reset controller. If you have clocks, then clock
controller.

>>
>>> +
>>> +  misc-csr:
>>> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
>>> +    description:
>>> +      phandle to the misc-csr region containing the HSIO control and
>>> +      status registers for misc (optional).
>>
>> Same problems.
>>
> "fsl,hsio-" prefix would be added later.


If you have some HSIO block, why do you reference it via phandle and why
do you put its properties (mode) here? What is the relation between HSIO
and this? So many questions... from your commit description all this
looks entirely wrong. You messed description of HSIO and now try to
bandage it with such properties. No.

NAK.



Best regards,
Krzysztof