Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] PCI: mediatek-gen3: Add power and reset control feature for downstream component

[AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>]

Il 06/11/23 09:46, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
> On 06/11/2023 09:36, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>> Il 06/11/23 08:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
>>> On 06/11/2023 07:12, Jian Yang wrote:
>>>> From: "jian.yang" <jian.yang@mediatek.com>
>>>>
>>>> Make MediaTek's controller driver capable of controlling power
>>>> supplies and reset pin of a downstream component in power-on and
>>>> power-off process.
>>>>
>>>> Some downstream components (e.g., a WIFI chip) may need an extra
>>>> reset other than PERST# and their power supplies, depending on
>>>> the requirements of platform, may need to controlled by their
>>>> parent's driver. To meet the requirements described above, I add this
>>>> feature to MediaTek's PCIe controller driver as an optional feature.
>>>
>>> NAK, strong NAK. This should be done in a generic way because nothing
>>> here is specific to Mediatek.
>>>
>>> You just implement power sequencing of devices through quirks specific
>>> to one controller.
>>>
>>> Work with others to provide common solution.
>>> https://lpc.events/event/17/contributions/1507/
>>>
>>
>> I agree that working with everyone else by adding pwrseq is a must, but other
>> other PCIe controllers are doing the exact same as this patch: if the supply
>> and gpio names are aligned with the others, why shouldn't we let this in and
>> then convert this driver, along with the others, to the new pwrseq subsystem
>> when it's ready?
> 
> Because you already push to the PCI controller bindings new properties
> which are not properties of the PCI controller.
> 
>>
>> That, because I expect the pwrseq to require a bit more time before being
>> ready to get upstream.
>>
>> P.S.: Check Tegra, Broadcom, RockChip DW, IMX6Q-pcie.
> 
> Every new hack will not make it faster. :( At some point one have to say
> - enough of hacks, start doing it properly with upstream.
> 

Eh, that's a fair point. I can't really disagree with that.

Cheers,
Angelo