linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v24 4/4] scsi: ufs: Add HPB 2.0 support

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]

Message-ID: <DM6PR04MB6575ECC05596740425EC948EFC9F9@DM6PR04MB6575.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Feb 2021 11:52:52 +0000
From:   Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To:     Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>,
        "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>
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>,
        Javier Gonzalez <javier.gonz@...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 v24 4/4] scsi: ufs: Add HPB 2.0 support

> 
> 
> > +static int ufshpb_issue_umap_all_req(struct ufshpb_lu *hpb)
> Maybe ufshpb_issue_umap_all_req is just a wrapper for
> ufshpb_issue_umap_req?
> e.g it calls ufshpb_issue_umap_req(hpb, int read_buferr_id = 0x3) ?
> Then on host mode inactivation:
> static int ufshpb_issue_umap_single_req(struct ufshpb_lu *hpb)
> {
>         return ufshpb_issue_umap_req(hpb, 0x1);
> }
Better yet, ufshpb_execute_umap_req can get *rgn as an extra argument.
ufshpb_issue_umap_all_req will call it with NULL, while
ufshpb_issue_umap_single_req will call it with the rgn to inactivate.

Then,  ufshpb_set_unmap_cmd takes the form:
static void ufshpb_set_unmap_cmd(unsigned char *cdb, struct ufshpb_region *rgn)
{
        cdb[0] = UFSHPB_WRITE_BUFFER;

        if (rgn) {
                cdb[1] = UFSHPB_WRITE_BUFFER_INACT_SINGLE_ID;
                put_unaligned_be16(rgn->rgn_idx, &cdb[2]);
        } else {
                cdb[1] = UFSHPB_WRITE_BUFFER_INACT_ALL_ID;
        }

        cdb[9] = 0x00;
}

Does it make sense?
Thanks,
Avri