linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 2/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8650: Enable MCQ support for UFS controller

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: <27qmlr3lie54lyigl5v434yzvbes5twy6zgtkqb52ycfh23vsp@zdg57ifh7kog>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 13:55:14 +0300
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
To: Ram Kumar Dwivedi <quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, mani@...nel.org,
        alim.akhtar@...sung.com, avri.altman@....com, bvanassche@....org,
        robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
        andersson@...nel.org, konradybcio@...nel.org, agross@...nel.org,
        James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8650: Enable MCQ support for
 UFS controller

On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 10:24:29PM +0530, Ram Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11-Aug-25 8:13 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 11/08/2025 16:31, Ram Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
> >> Enable Multi-Circular Queue (MCQ) support for the UFS host controller
> >> on the Qualcomm SM8650 platform by updating the device tree node. This
> >> includes adding new register region for MCQ and specifying the MSI parent
> >> required for MCQ operation.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ram Kumar Dwivedi <quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8650.dtsi | 7 ++++++-
> >>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > Way you organize your patchset is confusing. Why DTS is in the middle?
> > It suggests dependency and this would be strong objection from me.
> 
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> My current patch submission order is as follows:
> 
> 1.DT binding
> 2.Device tree
> 3.Driver changes
> 
> Please let me know if you'd prefer to rearrange the order and place the driver patch in the middle.

THe recommended way is opposite:

- DT bindings
- Driver changes
- DT changes

This lets maintainers to pick up their parts with less troubles.

> 
> 
> Regards,
> Ram
> > 
> > Please read carefully writing bindings, submitting patches in DT and SoC
> > maintainer profile.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof
> 

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry