Message-ID: <0d763853-5b1a-433e-9fa1-23ea0184b9bb@quicinc.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2025 01:38:40 +0530
From: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
CC: <vkoul@...nel.org>, <kishon@...nel.org>,
        <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>, <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        <bvanassche@....org>, <bjorande@...cinc.com>,
        <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
        <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 V3 5/9] phy: qcom-qmp-ufs: Remove qmp_ufs_com_init()



On 4/14/2025 1:13 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 12:58:48PM +0530, Nitin Rawat wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/11/2025 4:26 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 at 13:42, Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/11/2025 1:39 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 02:30:58PM +0530, Nitin Rawat wrote:
>>>>>> Simplify the qcom ufs phy driver by inlining qmp_ufs_com_init() into
>>>>>> qmp_ufs_power_on(). This change removes unnecessary function calls and
>>>>>> ensures that the initialization logic is directly within the power-on
>>>>>> routine, maintaining the same functionality.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which problem is this patch trying to solve?
>>>>
>>>> Hi Dmitry,
>>>>
>>>> As part of the patch, I simplified the code by moving qmp_ufs_com_init
>>>> inline to qmp_ufs_power_on, since qmp_ufs_power_on was merely calling
>>>> qmp_ufs_com_init. This change eliminates unnecessary function call.
>>>
>>> You again are describing what you did. Please start by stating the
>>> problem or the issue.
>>>
>>>>
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>
>> Sure, will update the commit with "problem" first in the next patchset when
>> I post.
> 
> Before posting the next iteration, maybe you can respond inline? It well
> might be that there is no problem to solve.a

Hi Dmitry,

Apologies for late reply , I just realized I missed responding to your 
comment on this patch.


There is no functional "problem" here.
===================================================================
The qmp_ufs_power_on() function acts as a wrapper, solely invoking 
qmp_ufs_com_init(). Additionally, the code within qmp_ufs_com_init() 
does not correspond well with its name.

Therefore, to enhance the readability and eliminate unnecessary function 
call inline qmp_ufs_com_init() into qmp_ufs_power_on().

There is no change to the functionality.
==================================================================


I agree with you that there isn't a significant issue here. If you 
insist, I'm okay with skipping this patch. Let me know your thoughts.


Regards,
Nitin


> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nitin
>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Nitin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c | 44 ++++++++++---------------
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c
>>>>>> index 12dad28cc1bd..2cc819089d71 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c
>>>>>> @@ -1757,31 +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_init(struct qmp_ufs *qmp)
>>>>>> -{
>>>>>> -    const struct qmp_phy_cfg *cfg = qmp->cfg;
>>>>>> -    void __iomem *pcs = qmp->pcs;
>>>>>> -    int ret;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -    ret = regulator_bulk_enable(cfg->num_vregs, qmp->vregs);
>>>>>> -    if (ret) {
>>>>>> -            dev_err(qmp->dev, "failed to enable regulators, err=%d\n", ret);
>>>>>> -            return ret;
>>>>>> -    }
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -    ret = clk_bulk_prepare_enable(qmp->num_clks, qmp->clks);
>>>>>> -    if (ret)
>>>>>> -            goto err_disable_regulators;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -    qphy_setbits(pcs, cfg->regs[QPHY_PCS_POWER_DOWN_CONTROL], SW_PWRDN);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -    return 0;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -err_disable_regulators:
>>>>>> -    regulator_bulk_disable(cfg->num_vregs, qmp->vregs);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -    return ret;
>>>>>> -}
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     static int qmp_ufs_com_exit(struct qmp_ufs *qmp)
>>>>>>     {
>>>>>> @@ -1799,10 +1774,27 @@ static int qmp_ufs_com_exit(struct qmp_ufs *qmp)
>>>>>>     static int qmp_ufs_power_on(struct phy *phy)
>>>>>>     {
>>>>>>        struct qmp_ufs *qmp = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
>>>>>> +    const struct qmp_phy_cfg *cfg = qmp->cfg;
>>>>>> +    void __iomem *pcs = qmp->pcs;
>>>>>>        int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>        dev_vdbg(qmp->dev, "Initializing QMP phy\n");
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -    ret = qmp_ufs_com_init(qmp);
>>>>>> +    ret = regulator_bulk_enable(cfg->num_vregs, qmp->vregs);
>>>>>> +    if (ret) {
>>>>>> +            dev_err(qmp->dev, "failed to enable regulators, err=%d\n", ret);
>>>>>> +            return ret;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +    ret = clk_bulk_prepare_enable(qmp->num_clks, qmp->clks);
>>>>>> +    if (ret)
>>>>>> +            goto err_disable_regulators;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +    qphy_setbits(pcs, cfg->regs[QPHY_PCS_POWER_DOWN_CONTROL], SW_PWRDN);
>>>>>> +    return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +err_disable_regulators:
>>>>>> +    regulator_bulk_disable(cfg->num_vregs, qmp->vregs);
>>>>>>        return ret;
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 2.48.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> linux-phy mailing list
>> linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org
>> https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists