On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 11:02 PM Asutosh Das <asutoshd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Let me give that a bit more thought - though I'm not sure how that'd work.
Adapt to the new ICB framework for bus bandwidth voting.
This requires the source/destination port ids.
Also this requires a tuple of values.
The tuple is for two different paths - from UFS master
to BIMC slave. The other is from CPU master to UFS slave.
This tuple consists of the average and peak bandwidth.
Signed-off-by: Asutosh Das <asutoshd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
.../devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt | 12 ++
drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c | 234 ++++++++++++++++-----
drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.h | 20 ++
3 files changed, 218 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt
index a99ed55..94249ef 100644
@@ -45,6 +45,18 @@ Optional properties:
Note: If above properties are not defined it can be assumed that the supply
regulators or clocks are always on.
+* Following bus parameters are required:
+- Please refer to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/
+ for more details on the above.
+qcom,msm-bus,name - string describing the bus path
+qcom,msm-bus,num-cases - number of configurations in which ufs can operate in
+qcom,msm-bus,num-paths - number of paths to vote for
+qcom,msm-bus,vectors-KBps - Takes a tuple <ib ab>, <ib ab> (2 tuples for 2 num-paths)
+ The number of these entries *must* be same as
I think we can do away with all of the qcom* ones, right? This should
be achievable with just interconnects and interconnect-names.
This was developed on the internal Chrome AU and ported to ufs-next.
Also, is this patch based on a downstream tree? I don't recognize a
lot of the context. We'll need a patch that's based on an upstream
I'll wait to review the rest of the patch until rev 2, since it's hard
to reason about the patch with all the downstream stuff in there.