linux-kernel - RE: RE: RE: [PATCH v22 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <DM6PR04MB657579C18529F8D42C47ACA7FC9E9@DM6PR04MB6575.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Feb 2021 07:51:34 +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: RE: 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?
> > > >
> > > > We try to sending HPB read several times within the
> requeue_timeout_ms.
> > > > Because it strategy has more benefit for overall performance in this
> > > > situation that many requests are queueing.
> > > This extra logic, IMO, should be optional.  Default none.
> > > And yes, in this case requeue_timeout should be a parameter for each OEM
> to
> > > scale.
> > And either way, hpb internal flows should not cause dumping the command.
> > Worse case - continue as READ10
> 
> However, this can improve the overall performance and should be used
> carefully. The problem can be solved by setting the default timeout
> ms to 0. And OEM can change it.
Yes.  I was thinking that too.

Thanks,
Avri

> 
> Thanks,
> Daejun