On 10/18/2016 07:28 AM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
> From: Yaniv Gardi <yga...@codeaurora.org>
> Since in future UFS Phy's the tx_iface_clk and rx_iface_clk
> are no longer exist, we should not fail when their initialization
> fail, but rather just report with debug message.
> Signed-off-by: Yaniv Gardi <yga...@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gau...@codeaurora.org>
> ---

Shouldn't we have a different compatible string on future UFS phys so
that we know which number of clks and what clks are required? That's how
we typically handle clk configurations changing. Making them optional
should really only be needed when they're really optional, i.e. things
will work fine if they're there or not.

Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to