linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 4/6] phy: qcom-qmp-ufs: Refactor qmp_ufs

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: <73dd1253-1b73-436f-af1b-94c724b2069e@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 16:15:42 +0100
From: neil.armstrong@...aro.org
To: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>, vkoul@...nel.org,
 kishon@...nel.org, manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org,
 James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
 konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com
Cc: quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/6] phy: qcom-qmp-ufs: Refactor qmp_ufs_exit callback.

On 18/03/2025 15:49, Nitin Rawat wrote:
> Rename qmp_ufs_disable to qmp_ufs_power_off and refactor
> the code to move all the power off sequence to qmp_ufs_power_off.
> 
> Co-developed-by: Ram Kumar Dwivedi <quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ram Kumar Dwivedi <quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
> ---
>   drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c | 41 ++-----------------------
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c
> index 3a80c2c110d2..675fef106d3b 100644
> --- a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c
> +++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c
> @@ -1757,19 +1757,6 @@ static void qmp_ufs_init_registers(struct qmp_ufs *qmp, const struct qmp_phy_cfg
>   	qmp_ufs_init_all(qmp, &cfg->tbls_hs_b);
>   }
> 
> -static int qmp_ufs_com_exit(struct qmp_ufs *qmp)
> -{
> -	const struct qmp_phy_cfg *cfg = qmp->cfg;
> -
> -	reset_control_assert(qmp->ufs_reset);
> -
> -	clk_bulk_disable_unprepare(qmp->num_clks, qmp->clks);
> -
> -	regulator_bulk_disable(cfg->num_vregs, qmp->vregs);
> -
> -	return 0;
> -}
> -
>   static int qmp_ufs_power_on(struct phy *phy)
>   {
>   	struct qmp_ufs *qmp = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
> @@ -1839,39 +1826,17 @@ static int qmp_ufs_power_off(struct phy *phy)
>   	struct qmp_ufs *qmp = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
>   	const struct qmp_phy_cfg *cfg = qmp->cfg;
> 
> -	/* PHY reset */
> -	if (!cfg->no_pcs_sw_reset)
> -		qphy_setbits(qmp->pcs, cfg->regs[QPHY_SW_RESET], SW_RESET);
> -
> -	/* stop SerDes */
> -	qphy_clrbits(qmp->pcs, cfg->regs[QPHY_START_CTRL], SERDES_START);
> -
>   	/* Put PHY into POWER DOWN state: active low */
>   	qphy_clrbits(qmp->pcs, cfg->regs[QPHY_PCS_POWER_DOWN_CONTROL],
>   			SW_PWRDN);

So where goes this code ? I think it should go in a new exit PHY op.

> 
> -	return 0;
> -}
> -
> -static int qmp_ufs_exit(struct phy *phy)
> -{
> -	struct qmp_ufs *qmp = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
> +	clk_bulk_disable_unprepare(qmp->num_clks, qmp->clks);
> 
> -	qmp_ufs_com_exit(qmp);
> +	regulator_bulk_disable(cfg->num_vregs, qmp->vregs);
> 
>   	return 0;
>   }
> 
> -static int qmp_ufs_disable(struct phy *phy)
> -{
> -	int ret;
> -
> -	ret = qmp_ufs_power_off(phy);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return ret;
> -	return qmp_ufs_exit(phy);
> -}
> -
>   static int qmp_ufs_set_mode(struct phy *phy, enum phy_mode mode, int submode)
>   {
>   	struct qmp_ufs *qmp = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
> @@ -1890,7 +1855,7 @@ static int qmp_ufs_set_mode(struct phy *phy, enum phy_mode mode, int submode)
> 
>   static const struct phy_ops qcom_qmp_ufs_phy_ops = {
>   	.power_on	= qmp_ufs_power_on,
> -	.power_off	= qmp_ufs_disable,
> +	.power_off	= qmp_ufs_power_off,
>   	.calibrate	= qmp_ufs_phy_calibrate,
>   	.set_mode	= qmp_ufs_set_mode,
>   	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
> --
> 2.48.1
> 
>