> > On 2019-12-13 02:24, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > On Thu 12 Dec 08:53 PST 2019, cang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > >> On 2019-12-12 15:00, Avri Altman wrote: > >> > > On Wed 11 Dec 22:01 PST 2019, cang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> > > > On 2019-12-12 12:53, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > >> > > > > On Wed 11 Dec 00:49 PST 2019, Can Guo wrote: > > [..] > >> > > > And in real cases, as the UFS is the boot device, UFS driver > >> > > > will always be probed during bootup. > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > The UFS driver will load and probe because it's mentioned in the > >> > > devicetree, but if either the ufs drivers or any of its > >> > > dependencies (phy, resets, clocks, etc) are built as modules it > >> > > might very well finish probing after lateinitcall. > >> > > > >> > > So in the even that the bsg is =y and any of these drivers are > >> > > =m, or if you're having bad luck with your timing, the list will > >> > > be empty. > >> > > > >> > > As described below, if bsg=m, then there's nothing that will load > >> > > the module and the bsg will not probe... > >> > Right. > >> > bsg=y and ufshcd=m is a bad idea, and should be avoided. > >> > > >> > >> Yeah, I will get it addressed in the next patchset. > >> > > > > If you build this around platform_device_register_data() from ufshcd I > > don't see a reason to add additional restrictions on this combination > > (even though it might not make much sense for people to use this > > combination). > > > > Regards, > > Bjorn > > Agree, thanks. While at it, maybe you can add few words in the "BSG Support" paragraph, In Documentation/scsi/ufs.txt. Thanks, Avri
