Hi Can, On 17-12-19, 15:10, cang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On 2019-12-17 12:13, Vinod Koul wrote: > > Hi Can, > > > > On 17-12-19, 08:37, cang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > On 2019-12-17 03:12, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 12:05 PM Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Can, > > > > > > > > > > On 14-11-19, 22:09, Can Guo wrote: > > > > > > Add reset control for host controller so that host controller can be reset > > > > > > as required in its power up sequence. > > > > > > > > > > I am seeing a regression on UFS on SM8150-mtp with this patch. I think > > > > > Jeff is seeing same one lenove laptop on 8998. > > > > > > > > Confirmed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 845 does not seem to have this issue and only thing I can see is > > > > > that on > > > > > sm8150 and 8998 we define reset as: > > > > > > > > > > resets = <&gcc GCC_UFS_BCR>; > > > > > reset-names = "rst"; > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jeffrey and Vinod, > > > > > > Thanks for reporting this. May I know what kind of regression do you > > > see on > > > 8150 and 8998? > > > BTW, do you have reset control for UFS PHY in your DT? > > > See 71278b058a9f8752e51030e363b7a7306938f64e. > > > > > > FYI, we use reset control on all of our platforms and it is > > > a must during our power up sequence. > > > > Yes we do have this and additionally both the DTS describe a 'rst' reset > > and this patch tries to use this. > > > > Can you please tell me which platform this was tested on how the reset > > was described in DT > > > > Thanks > > Hi Vinod, > > If you are using the 8998's DT present on upstream, you may also need to > enable > device reset on your platform. (We usually do a device reset before call > ufshcd_hba_enable()) > Given that 845 works fine, it may be the difference you have with 845. 845 > has device > reset support ready in upstream code, you can check sdm845-mtp.dts. > It is same for 8150, which is a lack of device reset support in upstream > code base. I am using 8150mtp and you can see the DTS at [1] with this patch I get phy timeout error [ 2.532594] qcom-qmp-phy 1d87000.phy: phy initialization timed-out If i revert this patch the Timeout goes away. UFS node for this platform is enabled in [2] and [3] I did add the GPIO as well for testing but that doesnt work, only thing that makes it work is rename the reset line to something other that 'rst' I found that with this patch the reset is invoked twice, not sure why! The 845 does not define a reset 'rst' but both 8150 and 8998 define that! [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/qcom/linux.git/log/?h=for-next [2]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/qcom/linux.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=3834a2e92229ef26d30de28acb698b2b23d3e397 [3]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/qcom/linux.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=3e5bf28d2c3981f949e848eec8a60e0b9b61189d > > To enable UFS device reset, please see > 1. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20190828191756.24312-4-bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx/ > 2. 53a5372ce326116f3e3d3f1d701113b2542509f4 Yes both are added for UFS and I am testing with these.. > > FYI, I tested the patch on 8250 and its family platforms. In my build, I > ported > change in #2 to my code base (in your case, make change to > drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-msm8998.c) and enable the GPIO in DT like > sdm845-mtp.dts Please see drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sm8150.c upstream > reset-gpios = <&tlmm 150 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; Yup, added: reset-gpios = <&tlmm 175 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; -- ~Vinod
