[v1,0/3] scsi: ufs: add error handlings of auto-hibern8

Message

Stanley Chu May 13, 2019, 2:36 p.m. UTC

Currently auto-hibern8 is activated if host supports
auto-hibern8 capability. However no error handlings are existed thus
this feature is kind of risky.

If "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail happens
during auto-hibern8 flow, the corresponding interrupt
"UIC_HIBERNATE_ENTER" or "UIC_HIBERNATE_EXIT" shall be raised
according to UFS specification.

This patch adds auto-hibern8 error handlings:

- Monitor "Hibernate Enter" and "Hibernate Exit" interrupts after
  auto-hibern8 feature is activated.
- If fail happens, trigger error handlings just like "manual-hibernate"
  fail and use the same flow: Identify errors and schedule UFS error
  handler in ufshcd_check_errors(), and then do host reset and restore
  in UFS error handler.

Stanley Chu (3):
  scsi: ufs: do not overwrite auto-hibern8 timer
  scsi: ufs: add error handling of auto-hibern8
  scsi: ufs: use re-factored auto_hibern8 function

 drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
 drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 13 +++++++++++++
 drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshci.h |  3 +++
 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Marc Gonzalez May 13, 2019, 2:51 p.m. UTC | #1

On 13/05/2019 16:36, Stanley Chu wrote:

> Currently auto-hibern8 is activated if host supports
> auto-hibern8 capability. However no error handlings are existed thus
> this feature is kind of risky.

This last sentence is not very idiomatic.

I would suggest:
"However, error-handling is not implemented, which makes the feature
somewhat risky."

> If "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail happens

I would suggest:
If either "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail during ...

> during auto-hibern8 flow, the corresponding interrupt
> "UIC_HIBERNATE_ENTER" or "UIC_HIBERNATE_EXIT" shall be raised
> according to UFS specification.
> 
> This patch adds auto-hibern8 error handlings:

error-handling

> - Monitor "Hibernate Enter" and "Hibernate Exit" interrupts after
>   auto-hibern8 feature is activated.

I just want to take this opportunity to ask a rhetorical question.

Who in the Great Heavens thought it would be a good idea to call the
feature "auto-hibern8" ?

Was it really worth it to save 2 characters by writing "8" instead
of "ate" ?

This bugs me so much that I just might send a patch to fix it up.

Regards.

Stanley Chu May 14, 2019, 6:25 a.m. UTC | #2

Hi Marc,

Thank you so much for below suggestions. I will fix them all in next
version.

On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 16:51 +0200, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> On 13/05/2019 16:36, Stanley Chu wrote:
> 
> > Currently auto-hibern8 is activated if host supports
> > auto-hibern8 capability. However no error handlings are existed thus
> > this feature is kind of risky.
> 
> This last sentence is not very idiomatic.
> 
> I would suggest:
> "However, error-handling is not implemented, which makes the feature
> somewhat risky."
> 
> > If "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail happens
> 
> I would suggest:
> If either "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail during ...
> 
> > during auto-hibern8 flow, the corresponding interrupt
> > "UIC_HIBERNATE_ENTER" or "UIC_HIBERNATE_EXIT" shall be raised
> > according to UFS specification.
> > 
> > This patch adds auto-hibern8 error handlings:
> 
> error-handling
> 
> > - Monitor "Hibernate Enter" and "Hibernate Exit" interrupts after
> >   auto-hibern8 feature is activated.
> 
> I just want to take this opportunity to ask a rhetorical question.
> 
> Who in the Great Heavens thought it would be a good idea to call the
> feature "auto-hibern8" ?
> 
> Was it really worth it to save 2 characters by writing "8" instead
> of "ate" ?
> 
> This bugs me so much that I just might send a patch to fix it up.

As far as I know, the term "HIBERN8" is mentioned in all UFS related
specifications, like UFS, UFSHCI, UniPro and M-PHY. So probably this
abbreviation has existed for a long time.

> 
> Regards.

Thanks,

Stanley

Avri Altman May 20, 2019, 5:58 a.m. UTC | #3

> 
> On 13/05/2019 16:36, Stanley Chu wrote:
> 
> > Currently auto-hibern8 is activated if host supports
> > auto-hibern8 capability. However no error handlings are existed thus
> > this feature is kind of risky.
> 
> This last sentence is not very idiomatic.
> 
> I would suggest:
> "However, error-handling is not implemented, which makes the feature
> somewhat risky."
> 
> > If "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail happens
> 
> I would suggest:
> If either "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail during ...
> 
> > during auto-hibern8 flow, the corresponding interrupt
> > "UIC_HIBERNATE_ENTER" or "UIC_HIBERNATE_EXIT" shall be raised
> > according to UFS specification.
> >
> > This patch adds auto-hibern8 error handlings:
> 
> error-handling
> 
> > - Monitor "Hibernate Enter" and "Hibernate Exit" interrupts after
> >   auto-hibern8 feature is activated.
> 
> I just want to take this opportunity to ask a rhetorical question.
> 
> Who in the Great Heavens thought it would be a good idea to call the
> feature "auto-hibern8" ?
> 
> Was it really worth it to save 2 characters by writing "8" instead
> of "ate" ?
> 
> This bugs me so much that I just might send a patch to fix it up.
As strange as it may be, this is not the product of the creative mind
Of the original driver's authors, nor even JEDEC guys which uses it in
their specs (both UFS & HCI).
This strange amalgam dates back to the mipi-unipro terminology.

Thanks,
Avri