Message ID | 20241016201249.2256266-12-bvanassche@acm.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Headers | show |
Series | Combine the two UFS driver scsi_add_host() calls | expand |
Hi, On 16/10/2024 22:12, Bart Van Assche wrote: > The previous patch in this series introduced identical code in both > branches of an if-statement. Move that code outside the if-statement. > > Reviewed-by: Bao D. Nguyen <quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com> > Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> > --- > drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 32 +++++++++++++------------------- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > index f34563e3a51d..70d89e154c4f 100644 > --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > @@ -10400,26 +10400,20 @@ static int ufshcd_add_scsi_host(struct ufs_hba *hba) > dev_err(hba->dev, "MCQ mode is disabled, err=%d\n", > err); > } > - err = scsi_add_host(hba->host, hba->dev); > - if (err) { > - dev_err(hba->dev, "scsi_add_host failed\n"); > - return err; > - } > - hba->scsi_host_added = true; > - } else { > - if (!hba->lsdb_sup) { > - dev_err(hba->dev, > - "%s: failed to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported)\n", > - __func__); > - return -EINVAL; > - } > - err = scsi_add_host(hba->host, hba->dev); > - if (err) { > - dev_err(hba->dev, "scsi_add_host failed\n"); > - return err; > - } > - hba->scsi_host_added = true; > } > + if (!is_mcq_supported(hba) && !hba->lsdb_sup) { > + dev_err(hba->dev, > + "%s: failed to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported)\n", > + __func__); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + err = scsi_add_host(hba->host, hba->dev); > + if (err) { > + dev_err(hba->dev, "scsi_add_host failed\n"); > + return err; > + } > + hba->scsi_host_added = true; > > hba->tmf_tag_set = (struct blk_mq_tag_set) { > .nr_hw_queues = 1, > This change regresses the Qualcomm SM8650 Platforms, QRD and HDK boards fails to boot: https://git.codelinaro.org/linaro/qcomlt/ci/staging/cdba-tester/-/jobs/182758#L1200 [ 5.155432] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: Resource ufs_mem not provided [ 5.155439] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: MCQ mode is disabled, err=-19 [ 5.155443] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: ufshcd_add_scsi_host: failed to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported) [ 5.155874] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: error -EINVAL: Initialization failed with error -22 then causes system crash: [ 15.400948] Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000006 [#1] PREEMPT SMP <snip> [ 15.544573] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 87 Comm: kworker/1:1 Tainted: G S 6.12.0-rc5-next-20241030 #1 [ 15.554938] Tainted: [S]=CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC [ 15.559098] Hardware name: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. SM8650 QRD (DT) [ 15.565984] Workqueue: events ufshcd_rtc_work [ 15.570628] pstate: 234000c5 (nzCv daIF +PAN -UAO +TCO +DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) [ 15.577986] pc : _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x34/0x8c [ 15.582981] lr : pm_runtime_get_if_active+0x24/0x9c [ 15.588159] sp : ffff800080df3d10 [ 15.591679] x29: ffff800080df3d10 x28: 0000000000000000 x27: 0000000000000000 [ 15.599235] x26: 0000000000000000 x25: ffff713a408fa1c0 x24: ffff713a40020205 [ 15.606788] x23: 0000000000000000 x22: 0000000000000001 x21: ffff713a427ca848 [ 15.614344] x20: 00000000000002a4 x19: 0000000000000000 x18: 0000000000000000 [ 15.621896] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000 x15: 00003a474f4572ec [ 15.629449] x14: 0000476e937c7726 x13: ffff713a40b64580 x12: 0000000000000001 [ 15.637005] x11: 000000038cd4b97b x10: 3fb907ccb9c2fb76 x9 : 1eb87ffdfb6b34c8 [ 15.644559] x8 : ffff713a40b655e8 x7 : ffff713a408fa200 x6 : 0000000000000020 [ 15.652113] x5 : 000073746e657665 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : 000000003b9ac9ff [ 15.659665] x2 : 0000000000000001 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : 00000000000002a4 [ 15.667218] Call trace: [ 15.669833] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x34/0x8c (P) [ 15.674829] pm_runtime_get_if_active+0x24/0x9c (L) [ 15.679998] pm_runtime_get_if_active+0x24/0x9c [ 15.684811] ufshcd_rtc_work+0x138/0x1b4 [ 15.688991] process_one_work+0x148/0x288 [ 15.693258] worker_thread+0x2cc/0x3d4 [ 15.697248] kthread+0x110/0x114 [ 15.700703] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 [ 15.704516] Code: b9000841 d503201f 52800001 52800022 (88e17c02) [ 15.710956] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Since next-20241028, bisect log on next-20241030: # bad: [86e3904dcdc7e70e3257fc1de294a1b75f3d8d04] Add linux-next specific files for 20241030 # good: [81983758430957d9a5cb3333fe324fd70cf63e7e] Linux 6.12-rc5 git bisect start 'HEAD' 'v6.12-rc5' # good: [9bebee868a9f662d3829e7529b99d63f14245673] Merge branch 'nand/next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mtd/linux.git git bisect good 9bebee868a9f662d3829e7529b99d63f14245673 # good: [64f1d5c3ad7542ea8f979988d2af75fd4e18148e] Merge branch 'for-backlight-next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lee/backlight.git git bisect good 64f1d5c3ad7542ea8f979988d2af75fd4e18148e # good: [38754c326c1fa76b673652b406d06d10004bf372] Merge branch 'char-misc-next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/char-misc.git git bisect good 38754c326c1fa76b673652b406d06d10004bf372 # bad: [08b6666d1a597b0ac3753ed4228707e5067db303] Merge branch 'for-next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/remoteproc/linux.git git bisect bad 08b6666d1a597b0ac3753ed4228707e5067db303 # good: [27709a220e05ec666c65b2266162bdd51a1f9b58] Merge branch 'spmi-next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sboyd/spmi.git git bisect good 27709a220e05ec666c65b2266162bdd51a1f9b58 # good: [0edaa545afbbcd7e8ff162f9fd8852c3589d2fa6] staging: gpib: fmh_gpib: Fix typo git bisect good 0edaa545afbbcd7e8ff162f9fd8852c3589d2fa6 # bad: [b92e5937e3523b0b7d41373681256bec78d7e134] scsi: ufs: core: Move code out of an if-statement git bisect bad b92e5937e3523b0b7d41373681256bec78d7e134 # good: [a3517717c3c0dbad771f5e491191b4b7b69808fb] Merge patch series "scsi: hisi_sas: Some fixes for hisi_sas" git bisect good a3517717c3c0dbad771f5e491191b4b7b69808fb # good: [5824e18b3db468e6eb5e9ef226eed80db26f581a] scsi: ufs: core: Remove redundant host_lock calls around UTMRLCLR git bisect good 5824e18b3db468e6eb5e9ef226eed80db26f581a # good: [0936001322646a15d7091f61232e5ded9bf1883f] scsi: ufs: core: Convert a comment into an explicit check git bisect good 0936001322646a15d7091f61232e5ded9bf1883f # good: [a390e6677f4119e3b9e6364ac2c5cbe3ef1321a2] scsi: ufs: core: Expand the ufshcd_device_init(hba, true) call git bisect good a390e6677f4119e3b9e6364ac2c5cbe3ef1321a2 # good: [72e979225ed2e9427396e317d33050bcf50ad899] scsi: ufs: core: Move the MCQ scsi_add_host() call git bisect good 72e979225ed2e9427396e317d33050bcf50ad899 # first bad commit: [b92e5937e3523b0b7d41373681256bec78d7e134] scsi: ufs: core: Move code out of an if-statement #regzbot introduced b92e5937e3523b0b7d41373681256bec78d7e134 Thanks, Neil
On 10/31/24 7:46 AM, Neil Armstrong wrote: > This change regresses the Qualcomm SM8650 Platforms, QRD and HDK boards > fails to boot: > https://git.codelinaro.org/linaro/qcomlt/ci/staging/cdba-tester/-/jobs/182758#L1200 > > [ 5.155432] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: Resource ufs_mem not provided > [ 5.155439] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: MCQ mode is disabled, err=-19 > [ 5.155443] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: ufshcd_add_scsi_host: failed > to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported) > [ 5.155874] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: error -EINVAL: Initialization > failed with error -22 > > then causes system crash: > [ 15.400948] Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000006 [#1] PREEMPT SMP > [ 15.667218] Call trace: > [ 15.669833] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x34/0x8c (P) > [ 15.674829] pm_runtime_get_if_active+0x24/0x9c (L) > [ 15.679998] pm_runtime_get_if_active+0x24/0x9c > [ 15.684811] ufshcd_rtc_work+0x138/0x1b4 > [ 15.688991] process_one_work+0x148/0x288 > [ 15.693258] worker_thread+0x2cc/0x3d4 > [ 15.697248] kthread+0x110/0x114 > [ 15.700703] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 > [ 15.704516] Code: b9000841 d503201f 52800001 52800022 (88e17c02) > [ 15.710956] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Hi Neil, Thank you for the very detailed report. I think that two bugs are being reported: * Support for non-MCQ UFSHCI 4.0 controllers is broken. * The RTC update code is activated too early. Is the patch below sufficient to fix both issues? Thanks, Bart. diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c index 0787387b7ce1..0b6b0cd4af33 100644 --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c @@ -8620,6 +8620,13 @@ static int ufshcd_add_lus(struct ufs_hba *hba) ufshcd_init_clk_scaling_sysfs(hba); } + /* + * The RTC update code accesses the hba->ufs_device_wlun->sdev_gendev + * pointer. + */ + schedule_delayed_work(&hba->ufs_rtc_update_work, + msecs_to_jiffies(UFS_RTC_UPDATE_INTERVAL_MS)); + ufs_bsg_probe(hba); scsi_scan_host(hba->host); @@ -8714,8 +8721,6 @@ static int ufshcd_post_device_init(struct ufs_hba *hba) ufshcd_force_reset_auto_bkops(hba); ufshcd_set_timestamp_attr(hba); - schedule_delayed_work(&hba->ufs_rtc_update_work, - msecs_to_jiffies(UFS_RTC_UPDATE_INTERVAL_MS)); if (!hba->max_pwr_info.is_valid) return 0; @@ -10345,8 +10350,7 @@ static int ufshcd_add_scsi_host(struct ufs_hba *hba) dev_err(hba->dev, "MCQ mode is disabled, err=%d\n", err); } - } - if (!is_mcq_supported(hba) && !hba->lsdb_sup) { + } else if (!hba->lsdb_sup) { dev_err(hba->dev, "%s: failed to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported)\n", __func__);
Le 31/10/2024 à 18:51, Bart Van Assche a écrit : > On 10/31/24 7:46 AM, Neil Armstrong wrote: >> This change regresses the Qualcomm SM8650 Platforms, QRD and HDK boards fails to boot: >> https://git.codelinaro.org/linaro/qcomlt/ci/staging/cdba-tester/-/jobs/182758#L1200 >> >> [ 5.155432] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: Resource ufs_mem not provided >> [ 5.155439] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: MCQ mode is disabled, err=-19 >> [ 5.155443] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: ufshcd_add_scsi_host: failed to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported) >> [ 5.155874] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: error -EINVAL: Initialization failed with error -22 >> >> then causes system crash: >> [ 15.400948] Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000006 [#1] PREEMPT SMP >> [ 15.667218] Call trace: >> [ 15.669833] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x34/0x8c (P) >> [ 15.674829] pm_runtime_get_if_active+0x24/0x9c (L) >> [ 15.679998] pm_runtime_get_if_active+0x24/0x9c >> [ 15.684811] ufshcd_rtc_work+0x138/0x1b4 >> [ 15.688991] process_one_work+0x148/0x288 >> [ 15.693258] worker_thread+0x2cc/0x3d4 >> [ 15.697248] kthread+0x110/0x114 >> [ 15.700703] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 >> [ 15.704516] Code: b9000841 d503201f 52800001 52800022 (88e17c02) >> [ 15.710956] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- > > Hi Neil, > > Thank you for the very detailed report. I think that two bugs are being > reported: > * Support for non-MCQ UFSHCI 4.0 controllers is broken. > * The RTC update code is activated too early. > > Is the patch below sufficient to fix both issues? Yes it does! Please add my: Tested-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> # SM8650-QRD Thanks, Neil > > Thanks, > > Bart. > > > diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > index 0787387b7ce1..0b6b0cd4af33 100644 > --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > @@ -8620,6 +8620,13 @@ static int ufshcd_add_lus(struct ufs_hba *hba) > ufshcd_init_clk_scaling_sysfs(hba); > } > > + /* > + * The RTC update code accesses the hba->ufs_device_wlun->sdev_gendev > + * pointer. > + */ > + schedule_delayed_work(&hba->ufs_rtc_update_work, > + msecs_to_jiffies(UFS_RTC_UPDATE_INTERVAL_MS)); > + > ufs_bsg_probe(hba); > scsi_scan_host(hba->host); > > @@ -8714,8 +8721,6 @@ static int ufshcd_post_device_init(struct ufs_hba *hba) > ufshcd_force_reset_auto_bkops(hba); > > ufshcd_set_timestamp_attr(hba); > - schedule_delayed_work(&hba->ufs_rtc_update_work, > - msecs_to_jiffies(UFS_RTC_UPDATE_INTERVAL_MS)); > > if (!hba->max_pwr_info.is_valid) > return 0; > @@ -10345,8 +10350,7 @@ static int ufshcd_add_scsi_host(struct ufs_hba *hba) > dev_err(hba->dev, "MCQ mode is disabled, err=%d\n", > err); > } > - } > - if (!is_mcq_supported(hba) && !hba->lsdb_sup) { > + } else if (!hba->lsdb_sup) { > dev_err(hba->dev, > "%s: failed to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported)\n", > __func__); >
On 10/31/24 12:55 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote: > Le 31/10/2024 à 18:51, Bart Van Assche a écrit : >> Is the patch below sufficient to fix both issues? > > Yes it does! Thank you for having tested this patch quickly. Would it be possible to test whether the patch below also fixes the reported boot failure? I think the patch below is a better fix. Thanks, Bart. diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c index a5a0646bb80a..3b592492e152 100644 --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c @@ -874,7 +874,8 @@ static void ufs_qcom_advertise_quirks(struct ufs_hba *hba) if (host->hw_ver.major > 0x3) hba->quirks |= UFSHCD_QUIRK_REINIT_AFTER_MAX_GEAR_SWITCH; - if (of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8550-ufshc")) + if (of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8550-ufshc") || + of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8650-ufshc")) hba->quirks |= UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_LSDBS_CAP; }
On 10/31/24 2:15 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 10/31/24 12:55 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote: >> Le 31/10/2024 à 18:51, Bart Van Assche a écrit : >>> Is the patch below sufficient to fix both issues? >> >> Yes it does! > > Thank you for having tested this patch quickly. Would it be possible > to test whether the patch below also fixes the reported boot failure? > I think the patch below is a better fix. > > Thanks, > > Bart. > > > diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c > index a5a0646bb80a..3b592492e152 100644 > --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c > +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c > @@ -874,7 +874,8 @@ static void ufs_qcom_advertise_quirks(struct ufs_hba > *hba) > if (host->hw_ver.major > 0x3) > hba->quirks |= UFSHCD_QUIRK_REINIT_AFTER_MAX_GEAR_SWITCH; > > - if (of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8550-ufshc")) > + if (of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8550-ufshc") || > + of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8650-ufshc")) > hba->quirks |= UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_LSDBS_CAP; > } (replying to my own email) Can anyone who has access to a Qualcomm SM8650 Platform please help with testing the above patch on top of linux-next? Thanks, Bart.
Hi, On 05/11/2024 23:01, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 10/31/24 2:15 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> On 10/31/24 12:55 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote: >>> Le 31/10/2024 à 18:51, Bart Van Assche a écrit : >>>> Is the patch below sufficient to fix both issues? >>> >>> Yes it does! >> >> Thank you for having tested this patch quickly. Would it be possible >> to test whether the patch below also fixes the reported boot failure? >> I think the patch below is a better fix. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bart. >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c >> index a5a0646bb80a..3b592492e152 100644 >> --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c >> +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c >> @@ -874,7 +874,8 @@ static void ufs_qcom_advertise_quirks(struct ufs_hba *hba) >> if (host->hw_ver.major > 0x3) >> hba->quirks |= UFSHCD_QUIRK_REINIT_AFTER_MAX_GEAR_SWITCH; >> >> - if (of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8550-ufshc")) >> + if (of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8550-ufshc") || >> + of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8650-ufshc")) >> hba->quirks |= UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_LSDBS_CAP; >> } > > (replying to my own email) > > Can anyone who has access to a Qualcomm SM8650 Platform please help with > testing the above patch on top of linux-next? Sorry I was traveling and I forgot about it, I'll try to test this today. Neil > > Thanks, > > Bart.
+ Mani On 05/11/2024 23:01, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 10/31/24 2:15 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> On 10/31/24 12:55 PM, Neil Armstrong wrote: >>> Le 31/10/2024 à 18:51, Bart Van Assche a écrit : >>>> Is the patch below sufficient to fix both issues? >>> >>> Yes it does! >> >> Thank you for having tested this patch quickly. Would it be possible >> to test whether the patch below also fixes the reported boot failure? >> I think the patch below is a better fix. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bart. >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c >> index a5a0646bb80a..3b592492e152 100644 >> --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c >> +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-qcom.c >> @@ -874,7 +874,8 @@ static void ufs_qcom_advertise_quirks(struct ufs_hba *hba) >> if (host->hw_ver.major > 0x3) >> hba->quirks |= UFSHCD_QUIRK_REINIT_AFTER_MAX_GEAR_SWITCH; >> >> - if (of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8550-ufshc")) >> + if (of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8550-ufshc") || >> + of_device_is_compatible(hba->dev->of_node, "qcom,sm8650-ufshc")) >> hba->quirks |= UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_LSDBS_CAP; >> } > > (replying to my own email) > > Can anyone who has access to a Qualcomm SM8650 Platform please help with > testing the above patch on top of linux-next? > > Thanks, > > Bart. Thanks, it does fix the issue. But it won't scale since the next platforms will probably need the same tweak in the future. Tested-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> # on SM8650-HDK Tested-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> # on SM8650-QRD Thanks, Neil
On 11/6/24 1:57 AM, Neil Armstrong wrote: > Thanks, it does fix the issue. But it won't scale since the next > platforms will probably need the same tweak in the future. > > Tested-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> # on SM8650-HDK > Tested-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> # on SM8650-QRD Hi Neil, Thanks for testing! The comment about future platforms is not clear to me. This patch fixes support for a non-standard controller (reports UFSHCI version 4 but supports UFSHCI 3 register set). Shouldn't all future platforms support the UFSHCI 4 register set? Thanks, Bart.
On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 09:51:06AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 11/6/24 1:57 AM, Neil Armstrong wrote: > > Thanks, it does fix the issue. But it won't scale since the next > > platforms will probably need the same tweak in the future. > > > > Tested-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> # on SM8650-HDK > > Tested-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> # on SM8650-QRD > > Hi Neil, > > Thanks for testing! > > The comment about future platforms is not clear to me. This patch fixes > support for a non-standard controller (reports UFSHCI version 4 but > supports UFSHCI 3 register set). Shouldn't all future platforms support > the UFSHCI 4 register set? > Yeah, the future platforms should (hopefully) no longer have this issue. - Mani
diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c index f34563e3a51d..70d89e154c4f 100644 --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c @@ -10400,26 +10400,20 @@ static int ufshcd_add_scsi_host(struct ufs_hba *hba) dev_err(hba->dev, "MCQ mode is disabled, err=%d\n", err); } - err = scsi_add_host(hba->host, hba->dev); - if (err) { - dev_err(hba->dev, "scsi_add_host failed\n"); - return err; - } - hba->scsi_host_added = true; - } else { - if (!hba->lsdb_sup) { - dev_err(hba->dev, - "%s: failed to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported)\n", - __func__); - return -EINVAL; - } - err = scsi_add_host(hba->host, hba->dev); - if (err) { - dev_err(hba->dev, "scsi_add_host failed\n"); - return err; - } - hba->scsi_host_added = true; } + if (!is_mcq_supported(hba) && !hba->lsdb_sup) { + dev_err(hba->dev, + "%s: failed to initialize (legacy doorbell mode not supported)\n", + __func__); + return -EINVAL; + } + + err = scsi_add_host(hba->host, hba->dev); + if (err) { + dev_err(hba->dev, "scsi_add_host failed\n"); + return err; + } + hba->scsi_host_added = true; hba->tmf_tag_set = (struct blk_mq_tag_set) { .nr_hw_queues = 1,