Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] phy: Add provision for tuning phy.

[Vivek Gautam]

Hi,


On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Heikki Krogerus
<heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:08:04PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Heikki Krogerus
>> > I think "setup" instead of "tune" is much more clear and reusable.
>>
>> I think "setup" will look more like first time setting up the phy,
>> which is rather served by "init" callback.
>> This i thought would serve the purpose of over-riding certain PHY
>> parameters, which would not have been
>> possible at "init" time.
>> Please correct my thinking if i am unable to understand your point here.
>
> OK, sorry I was not clear on this. I'm thinking the same, that this is
> something that is called later, for example when the controller is
> ready. Some ULPI phys need to be initialized, but since the controller
> provides the interface, it's usually not possible during init time.
> This hook could be used in that case as well.
>
> All I'm saying is that "tune" is a poor expression. You will need to
> add a comment explaining what the hook does in any case, so you'll
> have something like "this is something that is called when the
> controller is ready" or something similar. That will make it clear
> what it's meant for.

Ok, i think i should have kept a comment atleast :-(
I will add proper comments above, and as suggested in the mail by
Kishon, may be name it calibrate ?
What do you think ?

>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> heikki



-- 
Best Regards
Vivek Gautam
Samsung R&D Institute, Bangalore
India
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/