On Monday 09 November 2015 10:56:27 Alim Akhtar wrote: > From: Seungwon Jeon <essuuj@xxxxxxxxx> > > This patch introduces Exynos UFS host controller driver, > which mainly handles vendor-specific operations including > link startup, power mode change and hibernation/unhibernation. > > Signed-off-by: Seungwon Jeon <essuuj@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@xxxxxxxxxxx> I had looked at earlier versions of this and the new version looks much better. Just a few things I noticed: > drivers/scsi/ufs/Kconfig | 12 + > drivers/scsi/ufs/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-exynos-hw.c | 131 ++++ > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-exynos-hw.h | 43 ++ > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-exynos.c | 1304 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-exynos.h | 247 ++++++++ > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshci.h | 26 +- > drivers/scsi/ufs/unipro.h | 47 ++ It looks like an arbitrary split to separate out ufs-exynos-hw.{c,h} from ufs-exynos.{c,h}, it would become simpler if you just put the four files into one. > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/Kconfig b/drivers/scsi/ufs/Kconfig > index 5f4530744e0a..bc602be94458 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/Kconfig > @@ -83,3 +83,15 @@ config SCSI_UFS_QCOM > > Select this if you have UFS controller on QCOM chipset. > If unsure, say N. > + > +config SCSI_UFS_EXYNOS > + bool "EXYNOS specific hooks to UFS controller platform driver" > + depends on SCSI_UFSHCD_PLATFORM && ARCH_EXYNOS || COMPILE_TEST Maybe use depends on SCSI_UFSHCD_PLATFORM && (ARCH_EXYNOS || COMPILE_TEST) for clarity? nobody can remember the order in which this gets evaluated. ;-) > + select PHY_EXYNOS_UFS > + help > + This selects the EXYNOS specific additions to UFSHCD platform driver. > + UFS host on EXYNOS includes HCI and UNIPRO layer, and associates with > + UFS-PHY driver. Is it allowed to select PHY_EXYNOS_UFS without having a dependency on other symbols? > +static int exynos7_ufs_pre_link(struct exynos_ufs *ufs) > +{ > + struct ufs_hba *hba = ufs->hba; > + u32 val = ufs->drv_data->uic_attr->pa_dbg_option_suite; > + int i; > + > + exynos_ufs_enable_ov_tm(hba); > + for_each_ufs_tx_lane(ufs, i) > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB_SEL(0x297, i), 0x17); > + for_each_ufs_rx_lane(ufs, i) { > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB_SEL(0x362, i), 0xff); > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB_SEL(0x363, i), 0x00); > + } > + exynos_ufs_disable_ov_tm(hba); > + > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB(PA_DBG_OPTION_SUITE_DYN), 0xf); > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB(PA_DBG_OPTION_SUITE_DYN), 0xf); > + for_each_ufs_tx_lane(ufs, i) > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, > + UIC_ARG_MIB_SEL(TX_HIBERN8_CONTROL, i), 0x0); > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB(PA_DBG_TXPHY_CFGUPDT), 0x1); > + udelay(1); > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB(PA_DBG_OPTION_SUITE), val | (1 << 12)); > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB(PA_DBG_SKIP_RESET_PHY), 0x1); > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB(PA_DBG_SKIP_LINE_RESET), 0x1); > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB(PA_DBG_LINE_RESET_REQ), 0x1); > + udelay(1600); > + ufshcd_dme_set(hba, UIC_ARG_MIB(PA_DBG_OPTION_SUITE), val); 1.6 ms is a long time to block the CPU for. Are you allowed to call msleep() or uleep_range() in this function instead? > +struct exynos_ufs_drv_data exynos_ufs_drvs[] = { > +{ > + .compatible = "samsung,exynos7-ufs", > + .uic_attr = &exynos7_uic_attr, > + .quirks = UFSHCI_QUIRK_BYTE_ALIGN_UTRD | > + UFSHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_REQ_LIST_CLR | > + UFSHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_HCE | > + UFSHCI_QUIRK_SKIP_RESET_INTR_AGGR, > + .opts = EXYNOS_UFS_OPT_HAS_APB_CLK_CTRL | > + EXYNOS_UFS_OPT_BROKEN_AUTO_CLK_CTRL | > + EXYNOS_UFS_OPT_BROKEN_RX_SEL_IDX, > + .drv_init = exynos7_ufs_drv_init, > + .pre_link = exynos7_ufs_pre_link, > + .post_link = exynos7_ufs_post_link, > + .pre_pwr_change = exynos7_ufs_pre_pwr_change, > + .post_pwr_change = exynos7_ufs_post_pwr_change, > +}, { > +}, }; An array like this is probably not the ideal way to express it, in particular when there is only one entry. More on that below. > +static int exynos_ufs_parse_dt(struct device *dev, struct exynos_ufs *ufs) > +{ > + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node; > + struct exynos_ufs_drv_data *drv_data = exynos_ufs_drvs; > + struct exynos_ufs_uic_attr *attr; > + u32 freq[2]; > + int ret; > + > + while (drv_data->compatible) { > + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, drv_data->compatible)) { > + ufs->drv_data = drv_data; > + break; > + } > + drv_data++; > + } Here you loop over the array, but you actually match the compatible list already in the platform driver subsystem. > +static const struct of_device_id exynos_ufs_of_match[] = { > + { .compatible = "samsung,exynos7-ufs"}, > + {}, > +}; So just put a pointer to the right data into the .data member of of_device_id. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html