On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 19:14, Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 9/6/2023 1:34 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On 23/08/2023 12:17, Nitin Rawat wrote: > >> Add SC7280 specific register layout and table configs. > >> > >> Co-developed-by: Manish Pandey <quic_mapa@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Manish Pandey <quic_mapa@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c | 142 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 142 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c > >> b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c > >> index 3927eba8e468..514fa14df634 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c > >> +++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp-ufs.c > > > > [skipped tables programming] > > > > 4), > Sorry I quite didn't get this comment. what exactly is skipped ?Please > can you help explain? I skipped them, as I didn't have comments for them. > > > >> @@ -888,6 +993,40 @@ static const struct qmp_phy_cfg > >> sa8775p_ufsphy_cfg = { > >> .regs = ufsphy_v5_regs_layout, > >> }; > >> > >> +static const struct qmp_phy_cfg sc7280_ufsphy_cfg = { > >> + .lanes = 2, > >> + > >> + .offsets = &qmp_ufs_offsets, > >> + > >> + .tbls = { > >> + .serdes = sm8150_ufsphy_serdes, > >> + .serdes_num = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8150_ufsphy_serdes), > >> + .tx = sc7280_ufsphy_tx, > >> + .tx_num = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7280_ufsphy_tx), > >> + .rx = sc7280_ufsphy_rx, > >> + .rx_num = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7280_ufsphy_rx), > >> + .pcs = sc7280_ufsphy_pcs, > >> + .pcs_num = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7280_ufsphy_pcs), > >> + }, > >> + .tbls_hs_b = { > >> + .serdes = sm8150_ufsphy_hs_b_serdes, > >> + .serdes_num = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8150_ufsphy_hs_b_serdes), > >> + }, > >> + .tbls_hs_g4 = { > >> + .tx = sm8250_ufsphy_hs_g4_tx, > >> + .tx_num = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8250_ufsphy_hs_g4_tx), > >> + .rx = sc7280_ufsphy_hs_g4_rx, > >> + .rx_num = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7280_ufsphy_hs_g4_rx), > >> + .pcs = sm8150_ufsphy_hs_g4_pcs, > >> + .pcs_num = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8150_ufsphy_hs_g4_pcs), > >> + }, > >> + .clk_list = sm8450_ufs_phy_clk_l, > >> + .num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8450_ufs_phy_clk_l), > > > > This doesn't correspond to the bindings. This array has 3 enries, while > > in the bindings you have opted for two clocks for this PHY. > Sure. I'll update the bindings. Are you sure about the third clock? Neither sm8150 nor sm8250 used the qref clock. Or is that an omission on our side? > > > > >> + .vreg_list = qmp_phy_vreg_l, > >> + .num_vregs = ARRAY_SIZE(qmp_phy_vreg_l), > >> + .regs = ufsphy_v4_regs_layout, > >> +}; > >> + > >> static const struct qmp_phy_cfg sc8280xp_ufsphy_cfg = { > >> .lanes = 2, > >> > >> @@ -1648,6 +1787,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id > >> qmp_ufs_of_match_table[] = { > >> }, { > >> .compatible = "qcom,sa8775p-qmp-ufs-phy", > >> .data = &sa8775p_ufsphy_cfg, > >> + }, { > >> + .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-qmp-ufs-phy", > >> + .data = &sc7280_ufsphy_cfg, > >> }, { > >> .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-qmp-ufs-phy", > >> .data = &sm8150_ufsphy_cfg, > >> -- > >> 2.17.1 > >> > > > Thanks, > Nitin -- With best wishes Dmitry