Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] phy: core: Add phy bulk data helper functions

[Manivannan Sadhasivam]

On 2026-10-27 16:41 +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2026 at 06:09:49PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2026 at 07:41:52PM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2026 at 12:12:51PM +0200, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > On 29-09-26, 16:52, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> > > > > Add several helper functions that allow drivers to get several phy
> > > > > consumers in one operation. If any of the phy cannot be acquired then
> > > > > any phys that were got will be put before returning to the caller.
> > > > 
> > > > Do we have many such examples? Phy is not a many resource like
> > > > clock/regulators... Do we really need this. How many in kernel users
> > > > will benefit from this API?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I guess the following driver may benefit from bulk api. Most of them
> > > are PCIe drivers....
> > > 
> > > drivers/ata/ahci_imx.c
> > > drivers/pci/controller/cadence/pcie-cadence.c
> > > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-dra7xx.c
> > > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c
> > > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c
> > > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> > > 
> > > Note: I mean the bulk api, not just the things I added. I guess many
> > > may want devm_phy_bulk_get() or devm_of_phy_bulk_get() instead of
> > > devm_phy_bulk_get_all().
> > > 
> > 
> > No. I don't think the PCIe host controllers need the PHY bulk APIs. Most of the
> > time they need to control each PHY independently in a multi-port setup. So
> > having the bulk API doesn't seem logical to me.
> > 
> > - Mani
> > 
> > -- 
> > மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
> 
> Sorry for missing this one. For multi-port setup, the answer is no. The bulk
> API is not a good choice. But for multi-lane setup of one port, I think the
> answer is yes, the driver can just control the phy together and do not need
> a loop for that. At least for pcie-rockchip.c, I think it is reasonable, its
> logic show it use multi-lane setup, so I think it is fine to port.
> 

Yeah, if there are multiple PHYs to be controlled within a single RP for lane
muxing, then bulk APIs do make sense.

- Mani