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=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 7F764C2D0D2 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 04:21:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D4B821D7D for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 04:21:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1576815690; bh=TEM0b/JaWXh5vC0Me0WpSth4fQG3Gksa+E3z056weGw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=MFgVwNLr17Hn6Mf8Op/THYthUmB8blZvXqC1KmJRnLrailcUL6EcmWF4DZyHlxUv+ 1X89HbOgS5RzkN3ci/niLQHzNaj+Fv5KiQfkK/WNI56YfoJ5wZ8jmQJQjXEqegVRO/ 8BTLUfroQV7+6hI4vPS88wY3x9f7bfd4wkN3RZrQ= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727179AbfLTEV3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Dec 2019 23:21:29 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:45010 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726986AbfLTEV3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Dec 2019 23:21:29 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [106.201.107.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 788B921D7D; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 04:21:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1576815688; bh=TEM0b/JaWXh5vC0Me0WpSth4fQG3Gksa+E3z056weGw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=QmM0djdzoD5smoRw/7poKBsNkM4Wwhz9RSg2N67KXQsvEwKSUVNIsbuFSRxzS0UvA mCCDjztcD1+/uNHygFSGG1qvsqBhp1IiPunDdklJ/6BRC07aofviK6fi4dhQOPJUBs CnEF8p+fcgZtNjCIvvYhbqwy6O33MmCa8n7ABEGA= Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:51:23 +0530 From: Vinod Koul To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Kishon Vijay Abraham I , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Andy Gross , Can Guo , Jeffrey Hugo , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] phy: qcom-qmp: Increase the phy init timeout Message-ID: <20191220042123.GC2536@vkoul-mobl> References: <20191219150433.2785427-1-vkoul@kernel.org> <20191219150433.2785427-2-vkoul@kernel.org> <20191220020835.GK448416@yoga> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191220020835.GK448416@yoga> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 19-12-19, 18:08, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Thu 19 Dec 07:04 PST 2019, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > If we do full reset of the phy, it seems to take a couple of ms to come > > up on my system so increase the timeout to 10ms. > > > > This was found by full reset addition by commit 870b1279c7a0 > > ("scsi: ufs-qcom: Add reset control support for host controller") and > > fixes the regression to platforms by this commit. > > > > Suggested-by: Can Guo > > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul > > This does look familiar... > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20191107000917.1092409-3-bjorn.andersson@linaro.org/ > > > --- > > drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c > > index 091e20303a14..c2e800a3825a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c > > +++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c > > @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ > > /* QPHY_V3_PCS_MISC_CLAMP_ENABLE register bits */ > > #define CLAMP_EN BIT(0) /* enables i/o clamp_n */ > > > > -#define PHY_INIT_COMPLETE_TIMEOUT 1000 > > +#define PHY_INIT_COMPLETE_TIMEOUT 100000 > > 100ms seems a little bit excessive, and we do end up waiting this long > when we have PCIe links without an attached device... > > Do you need >10ms or could we just have my patch merged? Yeah I quick tested 10ms as well and seems good for me, so either ways if fine, but lets get it applied quickly :-) -- ~Vinod