Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:a852:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d18csp217469pxy; Fri, 7 May 2021 01:25:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyGLofxJFe8wm5VwOeAStE+yUJyryIamx9UmAVqF5vlHMqhhdLp+Flo7PnlFwcCzXotnuXH X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:f210:: with SMTP id gt16mr8696659ejb.52.1620375955053; Fri, 07 May 2021 01:25:55 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1620375955; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=sGZWojELqxkd891Vk6zWDvzLr2hu/sfI8hV+0HJew5Vk8VKin0OkmV5ZAYULAfVdJ2 Sspeebmme4S0FL0IjIdvMMO0jGO6nGBPGDgrfEkq8hTHTQR8qhEYkbiLHFQjY3OEryuy +EIz02OO36dpVgxWA9xC6vHdexzVHacQR+1uiaVTyvA+7aVC3VLQFT/QuyhqEkrIorpA 4wwth4FWYv9IR5fgbCxJ0pzCbotuAZcvxyklUKkATAAWL2X3PSgyo3aNmwjtLsrZoLIU /TeMRakUnX39ex8fw2I8hh1Rwk9pFBZlGhG4TxAeHanSrkpYHUzaOEzAlWx7EJBpm3ba boCg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=uTeZ4lkVp1rRZUXOTLlqy5BR/QPwKU4dDkwNATmLCpU=; b=HuL1jxZgDTX4FcuAWq1CKUWkq+lsOkrADs4wnsfHS+h1cXgIqmYq6isy9YBOd3EaHQ KUq4s2S4UCYsY0cTRAaJXrlz7X46bf/gdyHcIVCrrdXtiC/0eDJF+Tqoa7Gc/P3IFGV+ 5KTjH22sCCQpvV1ML3a/w9EwLJGOyo9zvvqlc1UX2vVDKcDibUuzmWYFWSg44UncCs5q UnHICv3tYXHOCDjVlFKmakMImtSWZ4DIcQs7GOK9OJtbwaMSN7qifezIJxQmDbbkkJVm 1nj7/EWAW/u4ihv+J8d3uemx873myXkNpTwutaUdivbtF+stkd9J51eZzss1o6Af+atZ MYMg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id bl4si5434129ejb.17.2021.05.07.01.25.30; Fri, 07 May 2021 01:25:55 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232375AbhEGG0b (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 7 May 2021 02:26:31 -0400 Received: from twspam01.aspeedtech.com ([211.20.114.71]:52505 "EHLO twspam01.aspeedtech.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230380AbhEGG03 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 May 2021 02:26:29 -0400 Received: from mail.aspeedtech.com ([192.168.0.24]) by twspam01.aspeedtech.com with ESMTP id 1476CRoH036991; Fri, 7 May 2021 14:12:27 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from steven_lee@aspeedtech.com) Received: from aspeedtech.com (192.168.100.253) by TWMBX02.aspeed.com (192.168.0.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 7 May 2021 14:24:18 +0800 Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 14:24:17 +0800 From: Steven Lee To: Andrew Jeffery CC: Philipp Zabel , Ulf Hansson , Rob Herring , Joel Stanley , Adrian Hunter , Ryan Chen , "moderated list:ASPEED SD/MMC DRIVER" , "moderated list:ASPEED SD/MMC DRIVER" , linux-mmc , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , "moderated list:ARM/ASPEED MACHINE SUPPORT" , open list , Hongwei Zhang , Ryan Chen , Chin-Ting Kuo Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] mmc: sdhci-of-aspeed: Assert/Deassert reset signal before probing eMMC Message-ID: <20210507062416.GD23749@aspeedtech.com> References: <20210506100312.1638-1-steven_lee@aspeedtech.com> <20210506100312.1638-6-steven_lee@aspeedtech.com> <20210506102458.GA20777@pengutronix.de> <19a81e25-dfa1-4ad3-9628-19f43f4230d2@www.fastmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19a81e25-dfa1-4ad3-9628-19f43f4230d2@www.fastmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.100.253] X-ClientProxiedBy: TWMBX02.aspeed.com (192.168.0.24) To TWMBX02.aspeed.com (192.168.0.24) X-DNSRBL: X-MAIL: twspam01.aspeedtech.com 1476CRoH036991 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org The 05/07/2021 09:32, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > > On Thu, 6 May 2021, at 19:54, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > Hi Steven, > > > > On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 06:03:12PM +0800, Steven Lee wrote: > > > + if (info) { > > > + if (info->flag & PROBE_AFTER_ASSET_DEASSERT) { > > > + sdc->rst = devm_reset_control_get(&pdev->dev, NULL); > > > > Please use devm_reset_control_get_exclusive() or > > devm_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive(). > > > > > + if (!IS_ERR(sdc->rst)) { > > > > Please just return errors here instead of ignoring them. > > The reset_control_get_optional variants return NULL in case the > > device node doesn't contain a resets phandle, in case you really > > consider this reset to be optional even though the flag is set? > > It feels like we should get rid of the flag and leave it to the > devicetree. > Do you mean adding a flag, for instance, "mmc-reset" in the device tree and call of_property_read_bool() in aspeed_sdc_probe()? > I'm still kind of surprised it's not something we want to do for the > 2400 and 2500 as well. > Per discussion with the chip designer, AST2400 and AST2500 doesn't need this implementation since the chip design is different to AST2600. > Andrew