| Message ID | 1723446114-153235-1-git-send-email-kwmad.kim@samsung.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v1] scsi: ufs: core: introduce override_cqe_ocs | expand |
On Mon, 2024-08-12 at 16:01 +0900, Kiwoong Kim wrote: > UFSHCI defines OCS values but doesn't specify what exact > conditions raise them. E.g. when some commands are nullified > or cleaned up, Exynos host reposts OCS_ABORT. Even if > an OEM wants to issue them again, not fail, current UFS driver > fails them because it set command result to DID_ABORT. > > So I think it needs another callback to replace the original OCS > value with the value that works the way you want. > I'm not clear on OCS was initiated by UFSHCI, but could you explain why it can't be altered within UFSHCI? > Signed-off-by: Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@samsung.com> > --- > drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h | 9 +++++++++ > drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 4 +++- > include/ufs/ufshcd.h | 1 + > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h > b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h > index ce36154..4dec6eb 100644 > --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h > +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h > @@ -275,6 +275,15 @@ static inline int > ufshcd_mcq_vops_config_esi(struct ufs_hba *hba) > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > } > > +static inline enum utp_ocs ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs(struct > ufs_hba *hba, > + enum utp_ocs > ocs) > +{ > + if (hba->vops && hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs) > + return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); it is useless until you should introudce an usage case. Kind regards, Bean
On 8/12/24 8:41 AM, Bean Huo wrote: > On Mon, 2024-08-12 at 16:01 +0900, Kiwoong Kim wrote: >> +static inline enum utp_ocs ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs(struct >> ufs_hba *hba, >> + enum utp_ocs >> ocs) >> +{ >> + if (hba->vops && hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs) >> + return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); > > it is useless until you should introduce an usage case. Indeed. If a new callback is introduced, a user for that callback should be introduced in the same patch series. Thanks, Bart.
Hi Kiwoong, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on jejb-scsi/for-next] [also build test ERROR on mkp-scsi/for-next linus/master v6.11-rc3 next-20240812] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Kiwoong-Kim/scsi-ufs-core-introduce-override_cqe_ocs/20240812-151156 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi.git for-next patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1723446114-153235-1-git-send-email-kwmad.kim%40samsung.com patch subject: [PATCH v1] scsi: ufs: core: introduce override_cqe_ocs config: arc-randconfig-002-20240812 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240812/202408122344.dvhCpFj0-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: arc-elf-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240812/202408122344.dvhCpFj0-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202408122344.dvhCpFj0-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): In file included from drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c:31: drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h: In function 'ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs': >> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h:282:24: error: too few arguments to function 'hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs' 282 | return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); | ^~~ drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c: In function 'ufshcd_get_tr_ocs': >> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c:828:53: error: 'hba' undeclared (first use in this function) 828 | return ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs(hba, | ^~~ drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c:828:53: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in -- In file included from drivers/ufs/core/ufs_bsg.c:14: drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h: In function 'ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs': >> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h:282:24: error: too few arguments to function 'hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs' 282 | return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); | ^~~ vim +282 drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h 277 278 static inline enum utp_ocs ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs(struct ufs_hba *hba, 279 enum utp_ocs ocs) 280 { 281 if (hba->vops && hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs) > 282 return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); 283 284 return ocs; 285 } 286
Hi Kiwoong, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on jejb-scsi/for-next] [also build test ERROR on mkp-scsi/for-next linus/master v6.11-rc3 next-20240812] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Kiwoong-Kim/scsi-ufs-core-introduce-override_cqe_ocs/20240812-151156 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi.git for-next patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1723446114-153235-1-git-send-email-kwmad.kim%40samsung.com patch subject: [PATCH v1] scsi: ufs: core: introduce override_cqe_ocs config: i386-buildonly-randconfig-004-20240812 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240813/202408131018.XQ8EvnAi-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: clang version 18.1.5 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 617a15a9eac96088ae5e9134248d8236e34b91b1) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240813/202408131018.XQ8EvnAi-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202408131018.XQ8EvnAi-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): In file included from drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c:31: >> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h:282:41: error: too few arguments to function call, expected 2, have 1 282 | return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ >> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c:828:39: error: use of undeclared identifier 'hba' 828 | return ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs(hba, | ^ drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c:10340:44: warning: shift count >= width of type [-Wshift-count-overflow] 10340 | if (!dma_set_mask_and_coherent(hba->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64))) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/dma-mapping.h:77:54: note: expanded from macro 'DMA_BIT_MASK' 77 | #define DMA_BIT_MASK(n) (((n) == 64) ? ~0ULL : ((1ULL<<(n))-1)) | ^ ~~~ 1 warning and 2 errors generated. -- In file included from drivers/ufs/core/ufs-debugfs.c:8: >> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h:282:41: error: too few arguments to function call, expected 2, have 1 282 | return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ 1 error generated. vim +282 drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h 277 278 static inline enum utp_ocs ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs(struct ufs_hba *hba, 279 enum utp_ocs ocs) 280 { 281 if (hba->vops && hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs) > 282 return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); 283 284 return ocs; 285 } 286
diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h index ce36154..4dec6eb 100644 --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h @@ -275,6 +275,15 @@ static inline int ufshcd_mcq_vops_config_esi(struct ufs_hba *hba) return -EOPNOTSUPP; } +static inline enum utp_ocs ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs(struct ufs_hba *hba, + enum utp_ocs ocs) +{ + if (hba->vops && hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs) + return hba->vops->override_cqe_ocs(hba); + + return ocs; +} + extern const struct ufs_pm_lvl_states ufs_pm_lvl_states[]; /** diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c index 0dd2605..83a1870 100644 --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c @@ -825,7 +825,9 @@ static enum utp_ocs ufshcd_get_tr_ocs(struct ufshcd_lrb *lrbp, struct cq_entry *cqe) { if (cqe) - return le32_to_cpu(cqe->status) & MASK_OCS; + return ufshcd_vops_override_cqe_ocs(hba, + le32_to_cpu(cqe->status) & + MASK_OCS); return lrbp->utr_descriptor_ptr->header.ocs & MASK_OCS; } diff --git a/include/ufs/ufshcd.h b/include/ufs/ufshcd.h index a43b142..64444fb 100644 --- a/include/ufs/ufshcd.h +++ b/include/ufs/ufshcd.h @@ -382,6 +382,7 @@ struct ufs_hba_variant_ops { int (*get_outstanding_cqs)(struct ufs_hba *hba, unsigned long *ocqs); int (*config_esi)(struct ufs_hba *hba); + enum utp_ocs (*override_cqe_ocs)(struct ufs_hba *hba, enum utp_ocs); }; /* clock gating state */
UFSHCI defines OCS values but doesn't specify what exact conditions raise them. E.g. when some commands are nullified or cleaned up, Exynos host reposts OCS_ABORT. Even if an OEM wants to issue them again, not fail, current UFS driver fails them because it set command result to DID_ABORT. So I think it needs another callback to replace the original OCS value with the value that works the way you want. Signed-off-by: Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@samsung.com> --- drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h | 9 +++++++++ drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 4 +++- include/ufs/ufshcd.h | 1 + 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)