Re: [PATCH] ata: ahci-platform: add reset control support

[Thierry Reding]

On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:54:29AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:30:53AM +0900, Kunihiko Hayashi wrote:
> > Add support to get and control a list of resets for the device
> > as optional and shared. These resets must be kept de-asserted until
> > the device is enabled.
> > 
> > This is specified as shared because some SoCs like UniPhier series
> > have common reset controls with all ahci controller instances.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  .../devicetree/bindings/ata/ahci-platform.txt      |  1 +
> >  drivers/ata/ahci.h                                 |  1 +
> >  drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c                     | 24 +++++++++++++++++++---
> >  3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> This causes a regression on Tegra because we explicitly request the
> resets after the call to ahci_platform_get_resources().
> 
> From a quick look, ahci_mtk and ahci_st are in the same boat, adding the
> corresponding maintainers to Cc.
> 
> Patrice, Matthias: does SATA still work for you after this patch? This
> has been in linux-next since next-20180327.
> 
> Given how this is one of the more hardware-specific bits, perhaps a
> better way to do this is to move reset handling into a Uniphier driver
> much like Tegra, Mediatek and ST?
> 
> That said, I don't see SATA support for any of the Socionext hardware
> either in the DT bindings or drivers/ata, so perhaps it'd be best to
> back this out again until we have something that's more well tested?

Tejun,

I just noticed that Linus already pulled this for v4.17, so backing out
isn't going to work anymore. Still, I don't think this is tested well
enough, and given the lack of users of this I think a revert is the best
option at this point.

Thierry

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature