From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D27E3C63777 for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 02:55:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E4AB20809 for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 02:55:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="ki2mc/Ft"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="jsaDTuyK" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1E4AB20809 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=eYmBQQeo9la2W1hwGVYmf1G7wPXq1p9Cx8x9vFKv1Fg=; b=ki2mc/FtKw+GXa6kO1GSj9VlP wGX5qwyujgH5SqUFefO6b1W12FX+TZ1b4VgsW8rXkktSp2aBo7ttIdkxzfh07ayKJc1WoyJw3JBX8 TZngcI7jlVrBWPIt5GSu3Sni9WyEpviPb/vhFIdmASlBbvme6RHgi4zRLTJThlRn9cJquWP82HmcM JsDo7xGmJMDFxoXr8jS8DHjboOsL/KV9WvvV0QPKWALHQpKPsO4ueGoFAn6xt51IkcnBLDp+AX7qk q+XRrppXg1xjXJ79JzYsdO/q7Br/gsC1z4zWwQlhnIkQnYmRGomcrYk4tbm/xneDayKSyc2IYZVMK wGACTqx+A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kjvnj-0001Gv-1h; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 02:53:59 +0000 Received: from mail-ot1-x343.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::343]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kjvnf-0001G7-9y for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 02:53:57 +0000 Received: by mail-ot1-x343.google.com with SMTP id k3so279951otp.12 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 2020 18:53:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=X45Jkktu9OpTlNX/eJhP3x2IhQt9mJKmemAaV1I+Aas=; b=jsaDTuyKW4WfAmZdcZXfomtxfloorQ2zFL1aVBN8BqiOwPjtiCpoxA6dwzQuc85xs0 8e3b1rH4IIq3u3grWhCHhgyNk2AwVqKtBjUt9DmGbZ4R1amR6AItIrbJFOevlbkTUk2g Gp7mv97DVDI1Td5T25kzfSJZuqddPHOtW6dxbYk+3e4ttdrRnGCC7AI5/InaokdWHBwO 9j+SgmAZSuEEmmMVyNUO/eo+C4OzBk5oL3YjFLc2KVOgSG1PGGL5Xc59Lpqpnf67Eupy 46WwecL4/0WcFnxLF8vgORg2PfeAwZz+N9pXv4I/HDwlJU9NnOKMHUCRWU14M+O9/tf6 DaGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=X45Jkktu9OpTlNX/eJhP3x2IhQt9mJKmemAaV1I+Aas=; b=YicvmQ4zvHyYA5W3HfuJob/od9OWmp4v2xHE35ElAEeLdMpoaeujqzMtjbDKA+GvfP PniRCYpGtvmVGRezlgJYW+OHodTW62If0Os8R5LfT22/22tD6pOVoM5wWKzc6MByUZp0 ZIM8ob5L3ZdhDCHvN9eWui6tAqFFR7/5hrjJj7Y3iztc8oZZSqQA+pSjuiBGa12S/KhC iz87Yxgy0w87kVX2aWx2Kf4um9dmoKjzzW+wur/TrFtT23eJQGdqf/BRTVWopk4rIJRy qQI583XVesZUt9pJpUTHD2+ojdOTbqmGAYBEk2dXTlBcpGnZ/AGLkyAP1Hrx9vvTPwUG 0g5A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530vLOkF+pqs2GO8lGpzcF4WK2U/K98TnEZAOYShbh5/X/IQ1G9N 9OpBOIzrD837uk7eAByTE9/5MA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxIWb8DvEdDoULocFRnGiXoanXS8eiSHOKS+D2bxTame5uxqYqLFWhLA33iUQlmxOQhMSBvzg== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6290:: with SMTP id x16mr464476otk.15.1606791232800; Mon, 30 Nov 2020 18:53:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from builder.lan (104-57-184-186.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [104.57.184.186]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 8sm79990otv.26.2020.11.30.18.53.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 30 Nov 2020 18:53:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 20:53:50 -0600 From: Bjorn Andersson To: "Asutosh Das (asd)" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] scsi: ufs: Remove pre-defined initial VCC voltage values Message-ID: References: <20201130091610.2752-1-stanley.chu@mediatek.com> <568660cd-80e6-1b8f-d426-4614c9159ff4@codeaurora.org> <4335d590-0506-d920-8e7f-f0f0372780f9@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4335d590-0506-d920-8e7f-f0f0372780f9@codeaurora.org> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201130_215355_695746_37965F6E X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 40.67 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: nguyenb@codeaurora.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, cang@codeaurora.org, alim.akhtar@samsung.com, beanhuo@micron.com, bvanassche@acm.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, peter.wang@mediatek.com, cc.chou@mediatek.com, andy.teng@mediatek.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com, chun-hung.wu@mediatek.com, avri.altman@wdc.com, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, jiajie.hao@mediatek.com, Stanley Chu , chaotian.jing@mediatek.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com, kuohong.wang@mediatek.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alice.chao@mediatek.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon 30 Nov 17:54 CST 2020, Asutosh Das (asd) wrote: > On 11/30/2020 3:14 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > On Mon 30 Nov 16:51 CST 2020, Asutosh Das (asd) wrote: > > > > > On 11/30/2020 1:16 AM, Stanley Chu wrote: > > > > UFS specficication allows different VCC configurations for UFS devices, > > > > for example, > > > > (1). 2.70V - 3.60V (By default) > > > > (2). 1.70V - 1.95V (Activated if "vcc-supply-1p8" is declared in > > > > device tree) > > > > (3). 2.40V - 2.70V (Supported since UFS 3.x) > > > > > > > > With the introduction of UFS 3.x products, an issue is happening that > > > > UFS driver will use wrong "min_uV/max_uV" configuration to toggle VCC > > > > regulator on UFU 3.x products with VCC configuration (3) used. > > > > > > > > To solve this issue, we simply remove pre-defined initial VCC voltage > > > > values in UFS driver with below reasons, > > > > > > > > 1. UFS specifications do not define how to detect the VCC configuration > > > > supported by attached device. > > > > > > > > 2. Device tree already supports standard regulator properties. > > > > > > > > Therefore VCC voltage shall be defined correctly in device tree, and > > > > shall not be changed by UFS driver. What UFS driver needs to do is simply > > > > enabling or disabling the VCC regulator only. > > > > > > > > This is a RFC conceptional patch. Please help review this and feel > > > > free to feedback any ideas. Once this concept is accepted, and then > > > > I would post a more completed patch series to fix this issue. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu > > > > --- > > > > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c | 10 +--------- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c > > > > index a6f76399b3ae..3965be03c136 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c > > > > @@ -133,15 +133,7 @@ static int ufshcd_populate_vreg(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > > vreg->max_uA = 0; > > > > } > > > > - if (!strcmp(name, "vcc")) { > > > > - if (of_property_read_bool(np, "vcc-supply-1p8")) { > > > > - vreg->min_uV = UFS_VREG_VCC_1P8_MIN_UV; > > > > - vreg->max_uV = UFS_VREG_VCC_1P8_MAX_UV; > > > > - } else { > > > > - vreg->min_uV = UFS_VREG_VCC_MIN_UV; > > > > - vreg->max_uV = UFS_VREG_VCC_MAX_UV; > > > > - } > > > > - } else if (!strcmp(name, "vccq")) { > > > > + if (!strcmp(name, "vccq")) { > > > > vreg->min_uV = UFS_VREG_VCCQ_MIN_UV; > > > > vreg->max_uV = UFS_VREG_VCCQ_MAX_UV; > > > > } else if (!strcmp(name, "vccq2")) { > > > > > > > > > > Hi Stanley > > > > > > Thanks for the patch. Bao (nguyenb) was also working towards something > > > similar. > > > Would it be possible for you to take into account the scenario in which the > > > same platform supports both 2.x and 3.x UFS devices? > > > > > > These've different voltage requirements, 2.4v-3.6v. > > > I'm not sure if standard dts regulator properties can support this. > > > > > > > What is the actual voltage requirement for these devices and how does > > the software know what voltage to pick in this range? > > > > Regards, > > Bjorn > > > > > -asd > > > > > > > > > -- > > > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, > > > Linux Foundation Collaborative Project > > For platforms that support both 2.x (2.7v-3.6v) and 3.x (2.4v-2.7v), the > voltage requirements (Vcc) are 2.4v-3.6v. The software initializes the ufs > device at 2.95v & reads the version and if the device is 3.x, it may do the > following: > - Set the device power mode to SLEEP > - Disable the Vcc > - Enable the Vcc and set it to 2.5v > - Set the device power mode to ACTIVE > > All of the above may be done at HS-G1 & moved to max supported gear based on > the device version, perhaps? > > Am open to other ideas though. > But that means that for a board where we don't know (don't want to know) if we have a 2.x or 3.x device we need to set: regulator-min-microvolt = <2.4V> regulator-max-microvolt = <3.6V> And the 2.5V and the two ranges should be hard coded into the ufshcd (in particular if they come from the specification). For devices with only 2.x or 3.x devices, regulator-{min,max}-microvolt should be adjusted accordingly. Note that driving the regulators outside these ranges will either damage the hardware or cause it to misbehave, so these values should be defined in the board.dts anyways. Also note that regulator_set_voltage(2.4V, 3.6V) won't give you "a voltage between 2.4V and 3.6V, it will most likely give either 2.4V or any more specific voltage that we've specified in the board file because the regulator happens to be shared with some other consumer and changing it in runtime would be bad. Regards, Bjorn _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel