UFS patchset

UFS patchset

[Joao Pinto]

Hi Martin,

Could you please give me feedback about the UFS patch-set?
The patches have been acked by various developers, so maybe could it be possible
to put it into the 4.7 queue?

Patch-set Cover Letter:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg95664.html

Thank you,
Joao

Re: UFS patchset

[Martin K. Petersen]

>>>>> "Joao" == Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> writes:

Joao,

Joao> Could you please give me feedback about the UFS patch-set?  The
Joao> patches have been acked by various developers, so maybe could it
Joao> be possible to put it into the 4.7 queue?

It is on my list.

I think we are OK from a SCSI perspective but I believe there were still
a couple of concerns in the ARM/device tree department. So I would like
some confirmation from those developers that the code is now acceptable.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering

Re: UFS patchset

[Joao Pinto]

On 4/29/2016 1:19 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>>>>>> "Joao" == Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> writes:
> 
> Joao,
> 
> Joao> Could you please give me feedback about the UFS patch-set?  The
> Joao> patches have been acked by various developers, so maybe could it
> Joao> be possible to put it into the 4.7 queue?
> 
> It is on my list.

Ok, great!

> 
> I think we are OK from a SCSI perspective but I believe there were still
> a couple of concerns in the ARM/device tree department. So I would like
> some confirmation from those developers that the code is now acceptable.
> 

The concerns were from Rob Herring about mixing PHY and controller in the
compatibility string, but that was justified. Check the extract:

">>
>>>
>>> Combining the phy and controller compatible strings is a bit strange.
>>> Generally, they would be separate nodes using the common phy binding.
>>>
>>
>> Correct, but in this case is just the compatibility string is just to
>> tell the dw ufs host that it has a 40-bit or a 20-bit test chip
>> connected. The Test chip is initialized by a unipro command sequence and
there is no more ops related to it.
>
> Okay. In that case, I think it should be a separate property unless
> the controller h/w is synthesized for one or the other.

Yes, the hardware must be synthesized for a certain PHY type, 20 or 40-bit.

>
> Rob
>

Joao"

Thanks,
Joao

Re: UFS patchset

[Martin K. Petersen]

>>>>> "Joao" == Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> writes:

Joao,

>> It is on my list.

Joao> Ok, great!

In a previous email you said you had sent v14 to linux-scsi. However, I
don't see neither v14, nor v13 in patchworks. The latest I have is v12
and it does not apply to 4.7/scsi-queue.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering

Re: UFS patchset

[Martin K. Petersen]

>>>>> "Martin" == Martin K Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com> writes:

Joao,

Martin> In a previous email you said you had sent v14 to
Martin> linux-scsi. However, I don't see neither v14, nor v13 in
Martin> patchworks. The latest I have is v12 and it does not apply to
Martin> 4.7/scsi-queue.

I found v14 in my mailbox. Not sure why it's not in patchworks.

In any case: It still doesn't apply to 4.7/scsi-queue and there are
several checkpatch warnings throughout the series. Please fix.

Also make sure to prefix your patch subject lines with "ufs:" so it's
easy to identify which subsystem they go into.

Thanks!

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering

Re: UFS patchset

[Joao Pinto]

Hi Martin!

On 4/30/2016 1:24 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>>>>>> "Martin" == Martin K Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com> writes:
> 
> Joao,
> 
> Martin> In a previous email you said you had sent v14 to
> Martin> linux-scsi. However, I don't see neither v14, nor v13 in
> Martin> patchworks. The latest I have is v12 and it does not apply to
> Martin> 4.7/scsi-queue.
> 
> I found v14 in my mailbox. Not sure why it's not in patchworks.
> 
> In any case: It still doesn't apply to 4.7/scsi-queue and there are
> several checkpatch warnings throughout the series. Please fix.

The patch were made based on a 4.7-queue from about 1 or 2 months. I will do the
needed fixes and send you the v15.

> 
> Also make sure to prefix your patch subject lines with "ufs:" so it's
> easy to identify which subsystem they go into.
> 
> Thanks!
> 

Thanks.

Re: UFS patchset

[Joao Pinto]

Hi Martin,

On 4/30/2016 1:24 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>>>>>> "Martin" == Martin K Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com> writes:
> 
> Joao,
> 
> Martin> In a previous email you said you had sent v14 to
> Martin> linux-scsi. However, I don't see neither v14, nor v13 in
> Martin> patchworks. The latest I have is v12 and it does not apply to
> Martin> 4.7/scsi-queue.
> 
> I found v14 in my mailbox. Not sure why it's not in patchworks.
> 
> In any case: It still doesn't apply to 4.7/scsi-queue and there are
> several checkpatch warnings throughout the series. Please fix.
> 
> Also make sure to prefix your patch subject lines with "ufs:" so it's
> easy to identify which subsystem they go into.
> 
> Thanks!
> 

As promissed I sent you a new patch set based on the latest 4.7 queue branch,
with "ufs:" prefix and completely tested and validated by checkpatch.

Thanks.
Joao