[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1210830415.21592275802431.JavaMail.epsvc@epcpadp1>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 10:18:42 +0900
From: Daejun Park <daejun7.park@...sung.com>
To: Bean Huo <huobean@...il.com>,
Daejun Park <daejun7.park@...sung.com>,
ALIM AKHTAR <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
"avri.altman@....com" <avri.altman@....com>,
"jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"asutoshd@...eaurora.org" <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>,
"beanhuo@...ron.com" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
"stanley.chu@...iatek.com" <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
"cang@...eaurora.org" <cang@...eaurora.org>,
"bvanassche@....org" <bvanassche@....org>,
"tomas.winkler@...el.com" <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
CC: "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sang-yoon Oh <sangyoon.oh@...sung.com>,
Sung-Jun Park <sungjun07.park@...sung.com>,
yongmyung lee <ymhungry.lee@...sung.com>,
Jinyoung CHOI <j-young.choi@...sung.com>,
Adel Choi <adel.choi@...sung.com>,
BoRam Shin <boram.shin@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] scsi: ufs: Add UFS-feature layer
Hi, Bean
>
> On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 16:23 +0900, Daejun Park wrote:
> > +void ufsf_scan_features(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + init_waitqueue_head(&hba->ufsf.sdev_wait);
> > + atomic_set(&hba->ufsf.slave_conf_cnt, 0);
> > +
> > + if (hba->dev_info.wspecversion >= HPB_SUPPORTED_VERSION &&
> > + (hba->dev_info.b_ufs_feature_sup & UFS_DEV_HPB_SUPPORT))
>
> How about removing this check "(hba->dev_info.wspecversion >=
> HPB_SUPPORTED_VERSION" since ufs with lower version than v3.1 can add
> HPB feature by FFU,
> if (hba->dev_info.b_ufs_feature_sup &UFS_FEATURE_SUPPORT_HPB_BIT) is
> enough.
OK, changing it seems no problem. But I want to know what other people think
about this version checking code.
Thanks,
Daejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists