Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] regulator: qca6390: add support for QCA639x powerup sequence

From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>, Peter Chen <peter.chen@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
	Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
	Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>,
	DTML <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] regulator: qca6390: add support for QCA639x powerup sequence
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2021 14:37:44 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA8EJppSV--TBjnGxGhaTHeKWdpM6uz70bg7diU3_K7OHoka4g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPDyKFr=8spZBD+bTe3SjS=nATL-ByFu_epnT2Z4chSuQNke2w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 at 13:10, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> - Peter (the email was bouncing)

+ Peter's kernel.org address

>
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 13:55, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 09:54:03AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > On Tue, 22 Jun 2021 at 00:32, Dmitry Baryshkov
> >
> > > > Qualcomm QCA6390/1 is a family of WiFi + Bluetooth SoCs, with BT part
> > > > being controlled through the UART and WiFi being present on PCIe
> > > > bus. Both blocks share common power sources. Add device driver handling
> > > > power sequencing of QCA6390/1.
> >
> > > Power sequencing of discoverable buses have been discussed several
> > > times before at LKML. The last attempt [1] I am aware of, was in 2017
> > > from Peter Chen. I don't think there is a common solution, yet.
> >
> > This feels a bit different to the power sequencing problem - it's not
> > exposing the individual inputs to the device but rather is a block that
> > manages everything but needs a bit of a kick to get things going (I'd
> > guess that with ACPI it'd be triggered via AML).  It's in the same space
> > but it's not quite the same issue I think, something that can handle
> > control of the individual resources might still struggle with this.
>
> Well, to me it looks very similar to those resouses we could manage
> with the mmc pwrseq, for SDIO. It's also typically the same kind of
> combo-chips that moved from supporting SDIO to PCIe, for improved
> performance I guess. More importantly, the same constraint to
> pre-power on the device is needed to allow it to be discovered/probed.

In our case we'd definitely use pwrseq for PCIe bus and we can also
benefit from using pwrseq for serdev and for platform busses also (for
the same story of WiFi+BT chips).

I can take a look at rewriting pwrseq code to also handle the PCIe
bus. Rewriting it to be a generic lib seems like an easy task,
plugging it into PCIe code would be more fun.

Platform and serdev... Definitely even more fun.

> Therefore, I think it would be worth having a common solution for
> this, rather than a solution per subsystem or even worse, per device.
>
> Unfortunately, it looks like Peter's email is bouncing so we can't get
> an update from him.

Let's see if the kernel.org email will get to him.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry