On 20-12-19, 15:41, Can Guo wrote: > On 2019-12-20 15:10, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 20-12-19, 14:00, Can Guo wrote: > Hi Vinod > > We are just removing the no_pcs_sw_reset for 8150, right? Why is it > possibly impacting 845 or older paltforms? > > In future, we will no longer need no_pcs_sw_reset for any newer QCOM UFS > PHY designs, as it is only for 845 and older platforms. > > I am sure QPHY_SW_RESET will be within PHY's address space since 8150. > Otherwise, it will be a regression in UFS PHY design. We had a lot of > discussion about this on 845 years ago, then design team decided to add > it on later platforms, so I don't see a reason to remove it again. :) > > I am not sure about the other qmp phys, but so long as UFS PHY needs the > reset, we need to keep it, as phy-qcom-qmp.c is a common driver. I am > not sure if I get your point here. Please correct me I am wrong. The argument here is that we are making this UFS specific and we do not know if this will be true in future as QMP is a common phy, so adding a separate flag helps to keep it independent and to be used in other situations. Thanks -- ~Vinod
