lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 10:39:57 +0800 From: Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org> To: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@...iatek.com> Cc: kuohong.wang@...iatek.com, asutoshd@...eaurora.org, nguyenb@...eaurora.org, hongwus@...eaurora.org, rnayak@...eaurora.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com, saravanak@...gle.com, salyzyn@...gle.com, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>, Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>, "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>, Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>, Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>, Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, Venkat Gopalakrishnan <venkatg@...eaurora.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/8] scsi: ufs: Add dev ref clock gating wait time support On 2020-02-06 08:55, Stanley Chu wrote: > Hi Can, > > On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 12:52 +0800, Can Guo wrote: > > >> Hi Stanley, >> >> We used to ask vendors about it, 50 is somehow agreed by them. Do you >> have a >> better value in mind? >> >> For me, I just wanted to give it 10, so that we can directly use >> usleep_range >> with it, no need to decide whether to use udelay or usleep_range. > > Actually I do not have any value in mind because I guess the 50us here > is just a margin time added for safety as your comments: "Give it more > time to be on the safe side". > > An example case is that some vendors only specify 1us in > bRefClkGatingWaitTime, so this 50us may be too long compared to > device's > requirement. If such device really needs this additional 50us, it shall > be specified in bRefClkGatingWaitTime. > > So if this additional delay does not have any special reason or not > mentioned by UFS specification, would you consider move it to vendor > specific implementations. By this way, it would be more flexible to be > controlled by vendors or by platforms. > > Thanks, > Stanley > >> >> Thanks, >> Can Guo. >> >> >> &dev_info->model, SD_ASCII_STD); Hi Stanley, FYI, the default values in bRefClkGatingWaitTime from vendors are around 50 - 100. I agree with you. I will just remove the extra delay here and let's handle it in our own platform drivers. Thanks, Can Guo.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists