| Message ID | cover.1724325280.git.kwmad.kim@samsung.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | scsi: ufs: introduce a callback to override OCS value | expand |
On Thu, 2024-08-22 at 20:15 +0900, Kiwoong Kim wrote: > UFSHCI defines OCS values but doesn't specify what exact > conditions raise them. So I think it needs another callback > to replace the original OCS value with the value that works > the way you want. > > v1 -> v2: fix build error for arguments > > Kiwoong Kim (2): > scsi: ufs: core: introduce override_cqe_ocs > scsi: ufs: ufs-exynos: implement override_cqe_ocs Hi kiwoong Kim, I didn't see your above two patches following your cover-letter, did you send patch with "--thread" optioin? Kind regards, Bean > > drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h | 9 +++++++++ > drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 11 +++++++---- > drivers/ufs/host/ufs-exynos.c | 8 ++++++++ > include/ufs/ufshcd.h | 1 + > 4 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >
On Thu, 2024-08-22 at 20:15 +0900, Kiwoong Kim wrote: > Kiwoong Kim (2): > scsi: ufs: core: introduce override_cqe_ocs > scsi: ufs: ufs-exynos: implement override_cqe_ocs Hi Kiwoong Kim, I didn't see your patch email,just post your second patch here, and provide my comments: +static enum utp_ocs exynos_ufs_override_cqe_ocs(enum utp_ocs ocs) +{ + if (ocs == OCS_ABORTED) + ocs = OCS_INVALID_COMMAND_STATUS; + return ocs; +} I wonder if you have considered the case where the command is aborted by the host software or by the device itself? If you change OCS to OCS_INVALID_COMMAND_STATUS, there will report a DID_REQUEUE to SCSI. Kind regards, Bean
On 8/22/24 7:54 AM, Bean Huo wrote: > I didn't see your above two patches following your cover-letter, did > you send patch with "--thread" optioin? I haven't received these patches either but found them here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/763ab716ba0207ecdad6f55ce38edf2d1bc7d04b.1724325280.git.kwmad.kim@samsung.com/ Bart.
On 8/22/24 8:42 AM, Bean Huo wrote: > On Thu, 2024-08-22 at 20:15 +0900, Kiwoong Kim wrote: >> Kiwoong Kim (2): >> scsi: ufs: core: introduce override_cqe_ocs >> scsi: ufs: ufs-exynos: implement override_cqe_ocs > > > Hi Kiwoong Kim, > > I didn't see your patch email,just post your second patch here, and > provide my comments: > > > +static enum utp_ocs exynos_ufs_override_cqe_ocs(enum utp_ocs ocs) > +{ > + if (ocs == OCS_ABORTED) > + ocs = OCS_INVALID_COMMAND_STATUS; > + return ocs; > +} > > > I wonder if you have considered the case where the command is aborted > by the host software or by the device itself? > > If you change OCS to OCS_INVALID_COMMAND_STATUS, there will report a > DID_REQUEUE to SCSI. The decision about what to do probably should depend on whether or not the command has been nullified. Thanks, Bart.
> +static enum utp_ocs exynos_ufs_override_cqe_ocs(enum utp_ocs ocs) { > + if (ocs == OCS_ABORTED) > + ocs = OCS_INVALID_COMMAND_STATUS; > + return ocs; > +} > > > I wonder if you have considered the case where the command is aborted > by the host software or by the device itself? I mean by the host software and Exynos host reports OCS_ABORTED only for the case when MCQ is enabled. > > If you change OCS to OCS_INVALID_COMMAND_STATUS, there will report a > DID_REQUEUE to SCSI. Yes. That's what I meant, in order to process them properly after UFS initialization. > > > Kind regards, > Bean Thank you.
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux- > scsi/763ab716ba0207ecdad6f55ce38edf2d1bc7d04b.1724325280.git.kwmad.kim@sam > sung.com/ > > Bart. I included you but sending the patch set was blocked. Sorry. Let me fix this as soon as possible. Thank you.
> > I wonder if you have considered the case where the command is aborted > > by the host software or by the device itself? > > > > If you change OCS to OCS_INVALID_COMMAND_STATUS, there will report a > > DID_REQUEUE to SCSI. > > The decision about what to do probably should depend on whether or not > the command has been nullified. > > Thanks, > > Bart. When MCQ is enabled, Exynos host reports OCS_ABORTED only for nullified cases. Thanks.