[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ata: ahci-platform: add reset control support

On 05-04-18 15:17, Patrice CHOTARD wrote:
> Hi Thierry
> On 04/05/2018 11:54 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:30:53AM +0900, Kunihiko Hayashi wrote:
>>> Add support to get and control a list of resets for the device
>>> as optional and shared. These resets must be kept de-asserted until
>>> the device is enabled.
>>> This is specified as shared because some SoCs like UniPhier series
>>> have common reset controls with all ahci controller instances.
>>> Signed-off-by: Kunihiko Hayashi <>
>>> ---
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/ata/ahci-platform.txt | 1 +
>>> drivers/ata/ahci.h | 1 +
>>> drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++---
>>> 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> This causes a regression on Tegra because we explicitly request the
>> resets after the call to ahci_platform_get_resources().
> I confirm, we got exactly the same behavior on STi platform.
>> From a quick look, ahci_mtk and ahci_st are in the same boat, adding the
>> corresponding maintainers to Cc.
>> Patrice, Matthias: does SATA still work for you after this patch? This
>> has been in linux-next since next-20180327.
> SATA is still working after this patch, but a kernel warning is
> triggered due to the fact that resets are both requested by
> libahci_platform and by ahci_st driver.

So in your case you might be able to remove the reset handling
from the ahci_st driver and rely on the new libahci_platform
handling instead? If that works that seems like a win to me.

As said elsewhere in this thread I think it makes sense to keep (or re-add
after a revert) the libahci_platform reset code, but make it conditional
on a flag passed to ahci_platform_get_resources(). This way we get
the shared code for most cases and platforms which need special handling
can opt-out.



> Patrice
>> Given how this is one of the more hardware-specific bits, perhaps a
>> better way to do this is to move reset handling into a Uniphier driver
>> much like Tegra, Mediatek and ST?
>> That said, I don't see SATA support for any of the Socionext hardware
>> either in the DT bindings or drivers/ata, so perhaps it'd be best to
>> back this out again until we have something that's more well tested?
>> Thierry

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-05 15:28    [W:0.084 / U:4.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site