[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE=gft6f9a2RoAvXR4+2tKZE-3chobb_HfbMDErfU1Q=_8uYwA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 11:34:42 -0700
From: Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>
To: subhashj@...eaurora.org, asutoshd@...eaurora.org,
vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
Vinayak Holikatti <vinholikatti@...il.com>,
jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, venkatg@...eaurora.org,
cang@...eaurora.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] scsi: ufs: add 2 lane support
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 11:19 AM Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>
> From: Venkat Gopalakrishnan <venkatg@...eaurora.org>
>
> Qcom ufs controller v3.1.0 supports 2 lanes, add support
> to configure 2 lanes during phy initialization.
I'm reviving this old chestnut, sorry I missed it initially. This
description is a little terse, and I'm actually confused about it. The
description makes it sounds like this patch is adding support for
2-lane UFS controllers, but the patch itself appears to only make the
UFS controller tolerant of a missing lane (or more specifically, a
missing lane clock). Can you describe a little more about what's going
on here, and perhaps fix the description?
I notice that the global clock controller has clocks for TX symbol 0,
and RX symbol 1, but seems to be missing GCC_UFS_PHY_TX_SYMBOL_1_CLK.
Was that an oversight, or is it really not there?
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkat Gopalakrishnan <venkatg@...eaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@...eaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c | 20 +++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> index 2b38db2..51889ad 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> @@ -113,10 +113,10 @@ static void ufs_qcom_disable_lane_clks(struct ufs_qcom_host *host)
> if (!host->is_lane_clks_enabled)
> return;
>
> - if (host->hba->lanes_per_direction > 1)
> + if (host->tx_l1_sync_clk)
> clk_disable_unprepare(host->tx_l1_sync_clk);
> clk_disable_unprepare(host->tx_l0_sync_clk);
> - if (host->hba->lanes_per_direction > 1)
> + if (host->rx_l1_sync_clk)
> clk_disable_unprepare(host->rx_l1_sync_clk);
> clk_disable_unprepare(host->rx_l0_sync_clk);
>
> @@ -147,18 +147,15 @@ static int ufs_qcom_enable_lane_clks(struct ufs_qcom_host *host)
> if (err)
> goto disable_tx_l0;
>
> - err = ufs_qcom_host_clk_enable(dev, "tx_lane1_sync_clk",
> - host->tx_l1_sync_clk);
> - if (err)
> - goto disable_rx_l1;
> + /* The tx lane1 clk could be muxed, hence keep this optional */
I'm confused by this comment. What do you mean the clock could be muxed?
> + if (host->tx_l1_sync_clk)
> + ufs_qcom_host_clk_enable(dev, "tx_lane1_sync_clk",
> + host->tx_l1_sync_clk);
> }
>
> host->is_lane_clks_enabled = true;
> goto out;
>
> -disable_rx_l1:
> - if (host->hba->lanes_per_direction > 1)
> - clk_disable_unprepare(host->rx_l1_sync_clk);
> disable_tx_l0:
> clk_disable_unprepare(host->tx_l0_sync_clk);
> disable_rx_l0:
> @@ -189,8 +186,9 @@ static int ufs_qcom_init_lane_clks(struct ufs_qcom_host *host)
> if (err)
> goto out;
>
> - err = ufs_qcom_host_clk_get(dev, "tx_lane1_sync_clk",
> - &host->tx_l1_sync_clk);
> + /* The tx lane1 clk could be muxed, hence keep this optional */
> + ufs_qcom_host_clk_get(dev, "tx_lane1_sync_clk",
> + &host->tx_l1_sync_clk);
> }
> out:
> return err;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists