Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Fri, 22 Apr 2022 10:40:10 -0500
From:   Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>
To:     Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
Cc:     martin.petersen@oracle.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
        avri.altman@wdc.com, alim.akhtar@samsung.com,
        bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        quic_asutoshd@quicinc.com, quic_cang@quicinc.com,
        linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] scsi: ufs: qcom: Fix acquiring the optional reset
 control line
Message-ID: <20220422154010.2cxk4qy5eikxujb2@halaneylaptop>
References: <20220422132140.313390-1-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
 <20220422132140.313390-2-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220422132140.313390-2-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 06:51:36PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Qcom UFS platforms, the reset control line seems to be optional
> (for SoCs like MSM8996 and probably for others too). The current logic
> tries to mimic the `devm_reset_control_get_optional()` API but it also
> continues the probe if there is an error with the declared reset line in
> DT/ACPI.
> 
> In an ideal case, if the reset line is not declared in DT/ACPI, the probe
> should continue. But if there is problem in acquiring the declared reset
> line (like EPROBE_DEFER) it should fail and return the appropriate error
> code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c | 10 +++++-----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> index 0d2e950d0865..5db0fd922062 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> @@ -1002,13 +1002,13 @@ static int ufs_qcom_init(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>  	host->hba = hba;
>  	ufshcd_set_variant(hba, host);
>  
> -	/* Setup the reset control of HCI */
> -	host->core_reset = devm_reset_control_get(hba->dev, "rst");
> +	/* Setup the optional reset control of HCI */
> +	host->core_reset = devm_reset_control_get_optional(hba->dev, "rst");
>  	if (IS_ERR(host->core_reset)) {
>  		err = PTR_ERR(host->core_reset);
> -		dev_warn(dev, "Failed to get reset control %d\n", err);
> -		host->core_reset = NULL;
> -		err = 0;
> +		if (err != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> +			dev_err(dev, "Failed to get reset control %d\n", err);

Could we use dev_err_probe() here?

Otherwise, looks good to me.

> +		goto out_variant_clear;
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Fire up the reset controller. Failure here is non-fatal. */
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>