[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fa4bfc9e-2e75-2e00-2b64-816f4bc26eda@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 10:48:06 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: "Bao D. Nguyen" <quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com>,
quic_asutoshd@...cinc.com, quic_cang@...cinc.com, mani@...nel.org,
stanley.chu@...iatek.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
beanhuo@...ron.com, avri.altman@....com, martin.petersen@...cle.com
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
Arthur Simchaev <Arthur.Simchaev@....com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/4] ufs: mcq: Add supporting functions for mcq
abort
On 3/7/23 20:01, Bao D. Nguyen wrote:
> +/* Maximum MCQ registers polling time */
registers -> register
> +#define MCQ_POLL_TIMEOUT 500
> struct ufshcd_mcq_opr_info_t mcq_opr[OPR_MAX];
> + u32 mcq_poll_ms;
> };
Why has the new member variable 'mcq_poll_ms' been introduced since its
value is never changed?
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists