Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] scsi: ufs: ufs-qcom: Allow the first init start with the maximum supported gear

[Can Guo]

Hi Mani,

On 11/9/2023 11:47 AM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 04:21:52PM +0800, Can Guo wrote:
> > Hi Mani,
> >
> > On 11/8/2023 1:23 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 08:46:09PM -0800, Can Guo wrote:
> > > > From: Can Guo <quic_cang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > During host driver init, the phy_gear is set to the minimum supported gear
> > > > (HS_G2). Then, during the first power mode change, the negotiated gear, say
> > > > HS-G4, is updated to the phy_gear variable so that in the second init the
> > > > updated phy_gear can be used to program the PHY.
> > > >
> > > > But the current code only allows update the phy_gear to a higher value. If
> > > > one wants to start the first init with the maximum support gear, say HS-G4,
> > > > the phy_gear is not updated to HS-G3 if the device only supports HS-G3.
> > >
> > > Can you elaborate when this can happen? AFAICS, there are 3 possibilities of
> > > initial phy gear with this series:
> > >
> > > 1. If ufshc is < 5.0, then G2 will be used.
> > > 2. If ufshc is >= 5.0 and if the version is populated in register, then that
> > > gear will be used. Most likely that gear can be G4/G5 depending on the device
> > > connected.
> > > 3. If ufshc is >=5.0 and version is not populated, then G4 will be used.
> > >
> > > In all the above cases, I do not see any necessity to switch the phy gear
> > > setting to lower one while scaling. Since the gears are backwards compatible,
> > > we always use one phy gear sequence. Moreover, we only have 2 init sequences.
> > >
> > > Please correct me if I'm missing anything.
> > >
> > > - Mani
> > In the next patch, I am setting the initial PHY gear to max HS gear read
> > from UFS host cap register, so that we don't need to keep updating the
> > initial value for host->phy_gear for different HW versions in future. FYI,
> > for HW ver 5 and 6, it is HS-G5. In future, the max gear might become HS-G6
> > or higher on newer HW verions.
> >
> > I the case #3, if HS-G5 is set to host->phy_gear, the first init uses HS-G5,
> > then after negotiation if the agreed gear is HS-G4, we need to update
> > host->phy_gear to HS-G4 (a lower value) such that we use a power saving PHY
> > gear settings during the 2nd init.
> >
> > If the commit message is making you confused, I can update it in next
> > version. Please let me if I made any mistakes here.
>
> I see redundancy while setting the phy_gear and it is leading to confusion.
> In ufs_qcom_set_host_params(), first you are setting phy_gear based on
> ufs_qcom_get_hs_gear(), then changing it again with the version check for v5.
>
> I don't see a necessity for "host->phy_gear = host_params->hs_tx_gear", since in
> the later check, you are covering both version <5 and >=5.
In the case of HW version >= 5, we are only overwriting the PHY gear 
only if the UFS device cannot support HS-G5. Hence, we need to give 
host->phy_gear an initial value.

> Btw, it would be better to move this logic to a separate function like
> ufs_qcom_get_phy_gear() to align with ufs_qcom_get_hs_gear().
OK, will do in next version.

Thanks,
Can Guo.
> - Mani
>
> > Thanks,
> > Can Guo.