On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:32:15PM +0100, Marc Gonzalez wrote: > Unfortunately, this optimization breaks UFS on systems where vccq > powers not only the Flash chip, but the host controller as well, > such as APQ8098 MEDIABOX or MTP8998: ... > In my opinion, the rationale for the original patch is questionable. > If neither the UFSHC, nor the Flash chip, require any load from vccq, > then that power rail should simply not be specified at all in the DT. If the supply is physically connected it should be valid to represent this in DT regardless of how or if the supply gets used at runtime. However it does sound like this support needs to be better thought through to make sure we have represented the supplies to the flash chip and the controller separately - it seems like right now there's no tracking of the supplies needed for the controller and the assumption is that only the flash chip needs managing which is breaking things.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
