linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] ufs: host: ufs-qcom: Clear qunipro_g4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <57b0669c-3826-dc33-36a4-2d8220da768a@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 13:28:53 +0100
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        "James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ufs: host: ufs-qcom: Clear qunipro_g4_sel for HW
 version major 5



On 16/11/2022 13:17, Abel Vesa wrote:
> On SM8550, depending on the Qunipro, we can run with G5 or G4.
> For now, when the major version is 5 or above, we go with G5.
> Therefore, we need to specifically tell UFS HC that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>
> ---
>   drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c | 4 ++++
>   drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.h | 2 ++
>   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> index ca60a5b0292b..72334aefe81c 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c
> @@ -227,6 +227,10 @@ static void ufs_qcom_select_unipro_mode(struct ufs_qcom_host *host)
>   	ufshcd_rmwl(host->hba, QUNIPRO_SEL,
>   		   ufs_qcom_cap_qunipro(host) ? QUNIPRO_SEL : 0,
>   		   REG_UFS_CFG1);
> +
> +	if (host->hw_ver.major == 0x05)
> +		ufshcd_rmwl(host->hba, QUNIPRO_G4_SEL, 0, REG_UFS_CFG0);
> +
>   	/* make sure above configuration is applied before we return */
>   	mb();
>   }
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.h b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.h
> index 751ded3e3531..10621055bf7f 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.h
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.h
> @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ enum {
>   	/* On older UFS revisions, this register is called "RETRY_TIMER_REG" */
>   	REG_UFS_PARAM0                      = 0xD0,
>   	REG_UFS_PA_LINK_STARTUP_TIMER       = 0xD8,
> +	REG_UFS_CFG0                        = 0xD8,
Are you sure these two should point to the same register? Maybe it 
deserves some kind of a comment?

Konrad
>   	REG_UFS_CFG1                        = 0xDC,
>   	REG_UFS_CFG2                        = 0xE0,
>   	REG_UFS_HW_VERSION                  = 0xE4,
> @@ -75,6 +76,7 @@ enum {
>   
>   /* bit definitions for REG_UFS_CFG1 register */
>   #define QUNIPRO_SEL		BIT(0)
> +#define QUNIPRO_G4_SEL		BIT(5)
>   #define UFS_PHY_SOFT_RESET	BIT(1)
>   #define UTP_DBG_RAMS_EN		BIT(17)
>   #define TEST_BUS_EN		BIT(18)