Hi, On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 01:24:49PM +0200, Patel, Satish wrote:
[ big snip ] > We have two options over here > > Option 1: > > Defining generic api to which can be mapped over multiple phys > For smartcard case, I have can thought of following mapping with new > generic apis as suggested. > > Smartcard_poweron -> power_on > Smartcard_powerdown -> power_off > Smartcard_set_voltage -> phy_set_voltage these three are generic enough > Smartcard_activate_card -> phy_activate_slot > Smartcard_deactivate_card -> phy_deactivate_slot this looks unnecessary, why can't you always activate the card when you phy_poweron ? > Smartcard_set_c4/c8/rst/io -> phy_set_pin why do you want to control each pin separately ? looks like something we don't want to allow, in order to prevent users fiddling with the HW directly. > Smartcard_warm_reset -> phy_warmreset phy_reset() > Smartcard_set_clkdiv -> phy_set_clock > Smartcard_get_clkdiv -> phy_get_clock why do you need to control the clock like that ? That should be something in the clock framework and, hey, it already exists: clk_set_rate() clk_get_rate() > Smartcard_set_atr_mute_timeout -> ?? > Smartcard_set_atr_early_timeout -> ?? > Smartcard_get_isr_status -> phy_get_status > Smartcard_get_version -> phy_get_version these look unnecessary. Why does any other entity need to know about the PHY version and Interrupt status ? -- balbi
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss