linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6125: Add UFS nodes

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: <d6fe27d0-729a-1730-9b57-6bdb2a76e6d0@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 20 Dec 2022 22:32:54 +0200
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
Cc:     Lux Aliaga <they@...t.lgbt>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6125: Add UFS nodes

On 20/12/2022 22:30, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 at 21:33, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20.12.2022 19:57, Lux Aliaga wrote:
>>> On 16/12/2022 08:24, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 15.12.2022 20:04, Lux Aliaga wrote:
>>>>> Adds a UFS host controller node and its corresponding PHY to
>>>>> the sm6125 platform.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lux Aliaga <they@...t.lgbt>
>>>>> ---
>>>> Please include a changelog, I don't know what you changed and
>>>> what you didn't. Also, you sent 4 revisions in one day, not
>>>> letting others review it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>    arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>    1 file changed, 67 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi
>>>>> index 7e25a4f85594..b64c5bc1452f 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi
>>>>> @@ -508,6 +508,73 @@ sdhc_2: mmc@...4000 {
>>>>>                status = "disabled";
>>>>>            };
>>>>>    +        ufs_mem_hc: ufs@...4000 {
>>>>> +            compatible = "qcom,sm6125-ufshc", "qcom,ufshc", "jedec,ufs-2.0";
>>>>> +            reg = <0x04804000 0x3000>, <0x04810000 0x8000>;
>>>>> +            reg-names = "std", "ice";
>>>>> +            interrupts = <GIC_SPI 356 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>>>> +            phys = <&ufs_mem_phy_lanes>;
>>>>> +            phy-names = "ufsphy";
>>>>> +            lanes-per-direction = <1>;
>>>>> +            #reset-cells = <1>;
>>>>> +            resets = <&gcc GCC_UFS_PHY_BCR>;
>>>>> +            reset-names = "rst";
>>>>> +
>>>>> +            clock-names = "core_clk",
>>>>> +                      "bus_aggr_clk",
>>>>> +                      "iface_clk",
>>>>> +                      "core_clk_unipro",
>>>>> +                      "ref_clk",
>>>>> +                      "tx_lane0_sync_clk",
>>>>> +                      "rx_lane0_sync_clk",
>>>>> +                      "ice_core_clk";
>>>>> +            clocks = <&gcc GCC_UFS_PHY_AXI_CLK>,
>>>>> +                 <&gcc GCC_SYS_NOC_UFS_PHY_AXI_CLK>,
>>>>> +                 <&gcc GCC_UFS_PHY_AHB_CLK>,
>>>>> +                 <&gcc GCC_UFS_PHY_UNIPRO_CORE_CLK>,
>>>>> +                 <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_XO_CLK_SRC>,
>>>>> +                 <&gcc GCC_UFS_PHY_TX_SYMBOL_0_CLK>,
>>>>> +                 <&gcc GCC_UFS_PHY_RX_SYMBOL_0_CLK>,
>>>>> +                 <&gcc GCC_UFS_PHY_ICE_CORE_CLK>;
>>>>> +            freq-table-hz = <50000000 240000000>,
>>>>> +                    <0 0>,
>>>>> +                    <0 0>,
>>>>> +                    <37500000 150000000>,
>>>>> +                    <0 0>,
>>>>> +                    <0 0>,
>>>>> +                    <0 0>,
>>>>> +                    <75000000 300000000>;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +            non-removable;
>>>>> +            status = "disabled";
>>>>> +        };
>>>>> +
>>>>> +        ufs_mem_phy: phy@...7000 {
>>>>> +            compatible = "qcom,sm6115-qmp-ufs-phy";
>>>> Krzysztof asked you to add a SoC-specific compatible in v1.
>>> I'm working on adding a new compatible for sm6125's UFS PHY. Should I copy sm6115's tables or just reference them in the sm6125's config in drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c?
>> If they're identical, you can just do something like this:
>>
>> compatible = "qcom,sm6125-qmp-ufs-phy", "qcom,sm6115-qmp-ufs-phy";
> 
> Ugh. I'd prefer to see either of the compatible strings here, but not
> both of them.

I hit send too quick, so the justification didn't get in.

Currently we list a single compatibility string for all QMP PHYs. Having 
just a single exception stands out, so I'd advise against doing that 
(despite Konrad's suggestion being technically correct).

> 
>>
>> And ensure your newly added compatible is documented in bindings.
>> This way, the driver will fall back to the 6115 compatible that's
>> defined in .c, but if we ever need to adjust something specific
>> for 6125, we will just use the define that we added here. That's
>> important, as we're supposed to stay backwards-compatible with
>> old device trees.
>>
>> Also, wrap your emails at around 80 chars or so, some people
>> are grumpy about that :P
>>
>> Konrad
>>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry