linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 2/9] scsi: ufshpb: Add host control mode support to rsp

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 2 Feb 2021 11:54:33 +0000
From:   Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:     "James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        yongmyung lee <ymhungry.lee@...sung.com>,
        Daejun Park <daejun7.park@...sung.com>,
        "alim.akhtar@...sung.com" <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        "asutoshd@...eaurora.org" <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>,
        Zang Leigang <zangleigang@...ilicon.com>,
        Avi Shchislowski <Avi.Shchislowski@....com>,
        Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
        "cang@...eaurora.org" <cang@...eaurora.org>,
        "stanley.chu@...iatek.com" <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 2/9] scsi: ufshpb: Add host control mode support to
 rsp_upiu

> On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 11:24:04AM +0000, Avri Altman wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 10:30:00AM +0200, Avri Altman wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshpb.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshpb.h
> > > > index afeb6365daf8..5ec4023db74d 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshpb.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshpb.h
> > > > @@ -48,6 +48,11 @@ enum UFSHPB_MODE {
> > > >       HPB_DEVICE_CONTROL,
> > > >  };
> > > >
> > > > +enum HPB_RGN_FLAGS {
> > > > +     RGN_FLAG_UPDATE = 0,
> > > > +     RGN_FLAG_DIRTY,
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > >  enum UFSHPB_STATE {
> > > >       HPB_PRESENT = 1,
> > > >       HPB_SUSPEND,
> > > > @@ -109,6 +114,7 @@ struct ufshpb_region {
> > > >
> > > >       /* below information is used by lru */
> > > >       struct list_head list_lru_rgn;
> > > > +     unsigned long rgn_flags;
> > >
> > > Why an unsigned long for a simple enumerated type?  And why not make
> > > this "type safe" by explicitly saying this is an enumerated type
> > > variable?
> > I am using it for atomic bit operations.
> 
> That's not obvious given you have an enumerated type above.  Seems like
> an odd mix...
Done.
Will make it clear that those are bit indices.