[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230104141045.GB8114@asutoshd-linux1.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2023 06:10:45 -0800
From: Asutosh Das <quic_asutoshd@...cinc.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
CC: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"Alim Akhtar" <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
<linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<stable@...r.kernel.org>, Can Guo <quic_cang@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: core: fix devfreq deadlocks
On Tue, Jan 03 2023 at 13:45 -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>On 12/22/22 02:21, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>+ /* Enable Write Booster if we have scaled up else disable it */
>>+ if (ufshcd_enable_wb_if_scaling_up(hba))
>>+ ufshcd_wb_toggle(hba, scale_up);
>
>Hi Asutosh,
>
>This patch is the second complaint about the mechanism that toggles
>the WriteBooster during clock scaling. Can this mechanism be removed
>entirely?
>
>I think this commit introduced that mechanism: 3d17b9b5ab11 ("scsi:
>ufs: Add write booster feature support"; v5.8).
>
>Thanks,
>
>Bart.
Hello Bart,
Load based toggling of WB seemed fine to me then.
I haven't thought about another method to toggle WriteBooster yet.
Let me see if I can come up with something.
IMT if you have a mechanism in mind, please let me know.
-asd
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists