linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: r0q: enable ufs storage

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: <7875ad35-366d-4480-979f-426f5760aa2a@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2025 14:08:54 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Eric Gonçalves <ghatto404@...il.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: r0q: enable ufs storage

On 9/25/25 11:37 PM, Eric Gonçalves wrote:
> 
> 
> On September 25, 2025 10:07:31 AM GMT-03:00, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com> wrote:
>> On 9/20/25 3:46 AM, Eric Gonçalves wrote:
>>> Enable UFS internal storage of the Samsung Galaxy S22.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Gonçalves <ghatto404@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>>  .../boot/dts/qcom/sm8450-samsung-r0q.dts      | 39 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450-samsung-r0q.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450-samsung-r0q.dts
>>> index c088f1acf6ea..0a55ce952f93 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450-samsung-r0q.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450-samsung-r0q.dts
>>> @@ -146,6 +146,24 @@ vreg_l5b_0p88: ldo5 {
>>>  			regulator-max-microvolt = <888000>;
>>>  			regulator-initial-mode = <RPMH_REGULATOR_MODE_HPM>;
>>>  		};
>>> +
>>> +		vreg_l6b_1p2: ldo6 {
>>> +			regulator-min-microvolt = <1200000>;
>>> +			regulator-max-microvolt = <1200000>;
>>> +			regulator-initial-mode = <RPMH_REGULATOR_MODE_HPM>;
>>> +		};
>>> +
>>> +		vreg_l7b_2p5: ldo7 {
>>> +			regulator-min-microvolt = <2504000>;
>>> +			regulator-max-microvolt = <2504000>;
>>> +			regulator-initial-mode = <RPMH_REGULATOR_MODE_HPM>;
>>> +		};
>>> +
>>> +		vreg_l9b_1p2: ldo9 {
>>> +			regulator-min-microvolt = <1200000>;
>>> +			regulator-max-microvolt = <1200000>;
>>> +			regulator-initial-mode = <RPMH_REGULATOR_MODE_HPM>;
>>> +		};
>>>  	};
>>>  
>>>  	regulators-1 {
>>> @@ -370,6 +388,27 @@ tsp_int_sleep: tsp_int_sleep_state {
>>>  	};
>>>  };
>>>  
>>> +&ufs_mem_hc {
>>> +	reset-gpios = <&tlmm 210 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
>>> +
>>> +	vcc-supply = <&vreg_l7b_2p5>;
>>> +	vcc-max-microamp = <1100000>;
>>
>> because you set this, you should also set regulator-allow-set-mode and
>> regulator-allowed-modes
>>
>> Konrad
> Why is that necessary?

Because that is then translated into the mode selection, based on
the aggregated usage

That said, you may also choose to omit this if you want to run all
regulators at high-power mode (less efficient at idle), which forcefully
ensures you're not hitting any current limits 

Konrad