On 09/02/2019 10:07, Avri Altman wrote: > On 08/02/2019 23:20, Marc Gonzalez wrote: > >> This reverts commit 60f0187031c05e04cbadffb62f557d0ff3564490. >> >> Calling ufshcd_set_vccq_rail_unused() breaks UFS init on two boards. >> I would say that vccq is *not* not needed. >> >> Reviewed-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@xxxxxxx> > > Those tags got switched off. What do you mean? > I still think that If you are reverting the quirk implementation, > you should remove the quirk listing as well. You're right, of course. I just thought it could wait until after this series was accepted, but I can fold it in v5, as a follow-up patch. > Also, as the v3 discussion held on several threads, > and new people might be joining in, > maybe you could reply to this patch with a couple of sentences summing-up > the various theories that this bring-up raised. Will do in v5, either in the commit message, or in the sub-text that is not committed. Regards.
