[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DM6PR04MB6575DA862FD50130DAF1E573FC809@DM6PR04MB6575.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2021 12:46:11 +0000
From: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To: "daejun7.park@...sung.com" <daejun7.park@...sung.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"asutoshd@...eaurora.org" <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>,
"stanley.chu@...iatek.com" <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
"cang@...eaurora.org" <cang@...eaurora.org>,
"bvanassche@....org" <bvanassche@....org>,
"huobean@...il.com" <huobean@...il.com>,
ALIM AKHTAR <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Javier Gonzalez <javier.gonz@...sung.com>
CC: "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
JinHwan Park <jh.i.park@...sung.com>,
SEUNGUK SHIN <seunguk.shin@...sung.com>,
Sung-Jun Park <sungjun07.park@...sung.com>,
yongmyung lee <ymhungry.lee@...sung.com>,
Jinyoung CHOI <j-young.choi@...sung.com>,
BoRam Shin <boram.shin@...sung.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v22 4/4] scsi: ufs: Add HPB 2.0 support
> @@ -2656,7 +2656,12 @@ static int ufshcd_queuecommand(struct Scsi_Host
> *host, struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
>
> lrbp->req_abort_skip = false;
>
> - ufshpb_prep(hba, lrbp);
> + err = ufshpb_prep(hba, lrbp);
> + if (err == -EAGAIN) {
> + lrbp->cmd = NULL;
> + ufshcd_release(hba);
> + goto out;
> + }
Did I miss-read it, or are you bailing out of wb failed e.g. because no tag is available?
Why not continue with read10?
> + if (blk_insert_cloned_request(q, req) != BLK_STS_OK)
> + return -EAGAIN;
Why did you choose to use blk_insert_cloned_request and not e.g. the more common blk_execute_rq_nowait?
> + hpb->stats.pre_req_cnt++;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> - ufshpb_set_hpb_read_to_upiu(hpb, lrbp, lpn, ppn, transfer_len);
> + if (ufshpb_is_required_wb(hpb, transfer_len)) {
> + err = ufshpb_issue_pre_req(hpb, cmd, &read_id);
> + if (err) {
> + unsigned long timeout;
> +
> + timeout = cmd->jiffies_at_alloc + msecs_to_jiffies(
> + hpb->params.requeue_timeout_ms);
> + if (time_before(jiffies, timeout))
> + return -EAGAIN;
Why requeue_timeout_ms needs to be a configurable parameter?
Why rq->timeout is not enough?
Thanks,
Avri
Powered by blists - more mailing lists