Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] scsi: ufs: Introduce a vops for resetting host controller

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2019-10-31 22:44, Mark Salyzyn wrote:
On 10/22/19 9:13 PM, Can Guo wrote:
Some UFS host controllers need their specific implementations of resetting to get them into a good state. Provide a new vops to allow the platform
driver to implement this own reset operation.

Signed-off-by: Can Guo <cang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 10 ++++++++++
  2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
index c28c144..161e3c4 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
@@ -3859,6 +3859,14 @@ static int ufshcd_link_recovery(struct ufs_hba *hba)
  	ufshcd_set_eh_in_progress(hba);
  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags);
  +	ret = ufshcd_vops_full_reset(hba);
+	if (ret)
+		dev_warn(hba->dev, "%s: full reset returned %d\n",
+				  __func__, ret);
+
+	/* Reset the attached device */
+	ufshcd_vops_device_reset(hba);
+
  	ret = ufshcd_host_reset_and_restore(hba);
    	spin_lock_irqsave(hba->host->host_lock, flags);

In all your cases, especially after this adjustment,
ufshcd_vops_full_reset is called blindly (+error checking message)
before ufshcd_vops_device_reset. What about dropping the .full_reset
(should really have been called .hw_reset or .host_reset) addition to
the vops, just adding ufshcd_vops_device_reset call here before
ufshcd_host_reset_and_restore, and in the driver folding the
ufshcd_vops_full_reset code into the .device_reset handler?

Would that be workable? It would be simpler if so.

I can see a desire for the heads up
(ufshcd_vops_full_reset+)ufshcd_vops_device_reset calls before
ufshcd_host_reset_and_restore because that function will spin 10
seconds waiting for a response from a standardized register, that
itself could be hardware locked up requiring product specific reset
procedures. But if that is the case, then what about all the other
calls to ufshcd_host_reset_and_restore in this file that are not
provided the heads up? My guess is that the host device only
demonstrated issues in the ufshcd_link_recovery handling path? Are you
sure this is the only path that tickles the controller into a hardware
lockup state?

Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn

Hi Mark Salyzyn,

Folding the "full_reset" vops inito "device_reset" vops is one choice for now. Shall do that. Your guess is correct. the head up is needed in ufshcd_link_recovery() path because link is already in bad state when we are here, expeically after hibern8 exit fails. So we need a full reset to PHY and host controller here before host_reset_and_restore.
But other calls to host_reset_and_restore are under good conditions.

Regards,
Can Guo.



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux