Date:   Mon, 14 Mar 2022 16:00:45 +0530
From:   Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
CC:     Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>,
        Sandeep Maheswaram <quic_c_sanm@...cinc.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        "Kishon Vijay Abraham I" <kishon@...com>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Wesley Cheng <wcheng@...eaurora.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, <quic_ppratap@...cinc.com>,
        <quic_kriskura@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,usb-snps-femto-v2: Add phy
 override params bindings

Hi Krzysztof,

On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:08:05AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 14/03/2022 10:40, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> > 
> > Thanks for your suggestions and guidance on this.
> > 
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 09:36:02AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 14/03/2022 09:16, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> >>> Hi Krzysztof,
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 08:39:57AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On 14/03/2022 04:29, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Krzysztof,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 04:59:22PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>>> On 03/03/2022 07:13, Sandeep Maheswaram wrote:
> >>>>>>> Add device tree bindings for SNPS phy tuning parameters.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sandeep Maheswaram <quic_c_sanm@...cinc.com>
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>  .../bindings/phy/qcom,usb-snps-femto-v2.yaml       | 125 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>>>  1 file changed, 125 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,usb-snps-femto-v2.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,usb-snps-femto-v2.yaml
> >>>>>>> index 0dfe691..227c097 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,usb-snps-femto-v2.yaml
> >>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,usb-snps-femto-v2.yaml
> >>>>>>> @@ -50,6 +50,131 @@ properties:
> >>>>>>>    vdda33-supply:
> >>>>>>>      description: phandle to the regulator 3.3V supply node.
> >>>>>>>  
> >>>>>>> +  qcom,hs-disconnect:
> >>>>>>> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> >>>>>>> +    description:
> >>>>>>> +      This adjusts the voltage level for the threshold used to
> >>>>>>> +      detect a disconnect event at the host. Possible values are.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ':', instead of full stop.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +      7 -> +21.56%
> >>>>>>> +      6 -> +17.43%
> >>>>>>> +      5 -> +13.32%
> >>>>>>> +      4 -> +9.73%
> >>>>>>> +      3 -> +6.3
> >>>>>>> +      2 -> +3.17%
> >>>>>>> +      1 -> 0, Design default%
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Use "default:" instead. Here and in other places.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +      0 -> -2.72%
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In current form this should be an enum... but actually current form is
> >>>>>> wrong. You should not store register values in DT. What if next version
> >>>>>> of hardware has a different meaning of these values?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Instead, you should store here meaningful values, not register values.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the feedback.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The values in % really makes the tuning easy. People look at the eye diagram
> >>>>> and decided whether to increase/decrease the margin. The absolute values
> >>>>> may not be that useful. All we need is an "adjustment" here. The databook
> >>>>> it self does not give any absolute values.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree to the "enum" suggestion which we have been following for the
> >>>>> qusb2 driver already. 
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The values have not changed in the last 5 years for this hardware block, so
> >>>>> defining enums for the % values would be really helpful. 
> >>>>
> >>>> I did not say you cannot store here percentages. Quite opposite - store
> >>>> here the percentages. Just do not store register value. No. Please read
> >>>> my comment again - meaningful values are needed.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> IIUC, you are asking us to come up with a meaningful values to encode the
> >>> percentage values. However, all the % increments are not linear, so we can't
> >>> come up with {min, max} scheme. Lets take an example of hostdisconnect
> >>> threshold.
> >>>
> >>> As per the data book,
> >>>
> >>> +      7 -> +21.56%
> >>> +      6 -> +17.43%
> >>> +      5 -> +13.32%
> >>> +      4 -> +9.73%
> >>> +      3 -> +6.3
> >>> +      2 -> +3.17%
> >>> +      1 -> 0, Design default%
> >>> +      0 -> -2.72%
> >>>
> >>> so how do we give meaningful values here? Does the below scheme make sense
> >>> to you?
> >>
> >> By "meaningful value" I mean something which has a understandable
> >> meaning to reader of this code or to hardware designer. For example
> >> percentage values or some units (ms, ns, Hz, mA, mV). The value used in
> >> register is not meaningful in that way to us because it has a meaning
> >> only to the hardware block. Storing register values is more difficult to
> >> read later, non-portable and non-scalable.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> #define QCOM_SNPS_FEMTO_HS_DISCONNECT_NEG_2P72	(-272)
> >>> #define QCOM_SNPS_FEMTO_HS_DISCONNECT_DEFAULT	0
> >>> #define QCOM_SNPS_FEMTO_HS_DISCONNECT_3P17	317
> >>> #define QCOM_SNPS_FEMTO_HS_DISCONNECT_6P3	63
> >>
> >> This is some define in driver, does not look related to bindings.
> >>
> >>> In the driver, we have a mapping (which can be per SoC if required in future)
> >>> that takes these values and convert to the correct values for a given
> >>> register.
> >>
> >> You focus on driver but I am talking here only about bindings.
> > 
> > I was saying we define those defines in include/dt-bindings/phy/... header and
> > use it in the device tree and as well in the driver.
> 
> Ah, I did not get it. That's not the solution for this case. defines in
> dt-bindings are for constants which already can be in DT, e.g. IDs. Your
> register values should not be stored in DT.
> 
These are again not register definitions. These are encodings that dT and
driver can use. These would be constants only, no?

> > 
> >>
> >> What could be the meaningful value? Percentage could work. You have
> >> there a negative value, so I wonder what type of percentage is it? What
> >> is the formula?
> > 
> > I just multiplied by 100 since device tree has no support for floating (as per
> > my knowledge). The negative value represents it lowers the disconnect
> > threshold by 2.72% of the default value. if it makes sense, we could also
> > start from 0 like below.
> 
> ok
> 
> > 
> > #define QCOM_SNPS_FEMTO_HS_DISCONNECT_NEG_2P72_PCT 0
> > #define QCOM_SNPS_FEMTO_HS_DISCONNECT_DEFAULT	1
> > #define QCOM_SNPS_FEMTO_HS_DISCONNECT_3P17_PCT	2
> > #define QCOM_SNPS_FEMTO_HS_DISCONNECT_6P3_PCT	3
> > 
> > The driver can have a table to map these bindings. This looks much better
> > than those x100 formula values.
> 
> Again mention driver how he can map it. I mostly don't care about the
> driver. :)
> 
> I think we are getting around the problem, so to emphasize again: do not
> store register values in the bindings/DT but its meaning, so in your
> case most likely percentages (or permille or ratio or some other value).
> 

I am really confused on what is that you mean by not storing the registers
here. We are only giving enum values for specific percentages supported by
the PHY. if you see -2.72 corresponds to 0 value on 0:2 bits of a register.
I did not mention that in the device tree. we are giving constant values
(enums) for all the possible percentage values. The user can see the
dt-bindings file and pass the approriate value based on the compliance
results. What is the objection?

can you please give an example if you have something in mind? 

Thanks,
Pavan

Powered by blists - more mailing lists