Re: [PATCH RFT 2/3] arm64: dts: qcom: glymur: Add USB related nodes

[Abel Vesa]

On 26-01-27 14:26:47, Wesley Cheng wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/27/2026 3:46 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > On 1/27/26 12:41 PM, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > > On 26-01-13 14:13:32, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > > On 1/13/26 1:33 PM, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > > > > From: Wesley Cheng <wesley.cheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > 
> > > > > The Glymur USB system contains 3 USB type C ports, 1 USB multiport
> > > > > controller and a USB 2.0 only controller. This encompasses 5 SS USB QMP
> > > > > PHYs (3 combo and 2 uni) and 6 M31 eUSB2 PHYs. All controllers are SNPS
> > > > > DWC3 based, so describe them as flattened DWC3 QCOM nodes.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Wesley Cheng <wesley.cheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Co-developed-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > [...]
> > > > 
> > > > > +			snps,dis_u2_susphy_quirk;
> > > > > +			snps,dis_enblslpm_quirk;
> > > > > +			snps,dis_u3_susphy_quirk;
> > > > > +			snps,usb2-lpm-disable;
> > > > 
> > > > Other SoCs have a list that's much longer, please consult Wesley if
> > > > this list is enough
> > > 
> > > Checked with Wesley. He confirmed that this trimmed list is fine.
> > > He said he dropped the rest since they are related to the power saving
> > > features like USB2/3 LPM (l1 or u1/u2) and we don't seem need those.
> > 
> > Is that to say that those erratas were fixed in this hardware?
> > 
> > Low-power states of the link are no less than desired is possible..
> > 
> 
> I think it was misunderstood.  We should keep the same quirks as our
> previous targets to enable USB LPM support in certain cases.
> 
> snps,hird-threshold = /bits/ 8 <0x0>;
> snps,usb2-gadget-lpm-disable;
> snps,dis-u1-entry-quirk;
> snps,dis-u2-entry-quirk;
> snps,is-utmi-l1-suspend;
> snps,usb3_lpm_capable;
> snps,has-lpm-erratum;
> tx-fifo-resize;
> snps,dis_u2_susphy_quirk;
> snps,dis_enblslpm_quirk;
> snps,usb2-lpm-disable;
> 
> There are some questionable ones that I'm on the fence though, which we
> should consider removing:
> snps,usb2-lpm-disable
> snps,usb2-gadget-lpm-disable
> 
> USB L1 support is routinely being verified on our devices (in host and
> device modes), so if its power over performance, we should consider removing
> the properties to disable USB L1. (esp since we're defining the HIRD
> threshold as well...)

This should've been sorted out months ago! As part of the initial bring-up or
even the initial submission here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250925-v3_glymur_introduction-v1-23-24b601bbecc0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

Anyway, is the following list the one we should use then?

snps,hird-threshold = /bits/ 8 <0x0>;
snps,dis-u1-entry-quirk;
snps,dis-u2-entry-quirk;
snps,is-utmi-l1-suspend;
snps,usb3_lpm_capable;
snps,has-lpm-erratum;
tx-fifo-resize;
snps,dis_u2_susphy_quirk;
snps,dis_enblslpm_quirk;

Lets decide already ...