linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 2/2] ufs: poll HCS.UCRDY before issuing a UIC command

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: <f1e154c4-bbb3-18a2-cb7a-41adae292b48@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2023 14:26:27 +0300
From:   Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To:     Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@...sung.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
        avri.altman@....com, bvanassche@....org, jejb@...ux.ibm.com,
        martin.petersen@...cle.com, beanhuo@...ron.com, sc.suh@...sung.com,
        hy50.seo@...sung.com, sh425.lee@...sung.com,
        kwangwon.min@...sung.com, junwoo80.lee@...sung.com,
        wkon.kim@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 2/2] ufs: poll HCS.UCRDY before issuing a UIC
 command

On 2/08/23 04:28, Kiwoong Kim wrote:
> With auto hibern8 enabled, UIC could be working
> for a while to process a hibern8 operation and HCI
> reports UIC not ready for a short term through HCS.UCRDY.
> And UFS driver can't recognize the operation.
> UFSHCI spec specifies UCRDY like this:
> whether the host controller is ready to process UIC COMMAND
> 
> The 'ready' could be seen as many different meanings. If the meaning
> includes not processing any request from HCI, processing a hibern8
> operation can be 'not ready'. In this situation, the driver needs to
> wait until the operations is completed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@...sung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 7 ++++++-
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> index a89d39a..10ccc85 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>  #include <linux/sched/clock.h>
> +#include <linux/iopoll.h>
>  #include <scsi/scsi_cmnd.h>
>  #include <scsi/scsi_dbg.h>
>  #include <scsi/scsi_driver.h>
> @@ -2365,7 +2366,11 @@ static inline int ufshcd_hba_capabilities(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>   */
>  static inline bool ufshcd_ready_for_uic_cmd(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>  {
> -	return ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_CONTROLLER_STATUS) & UIC_COMMAND_READY;
> +	u32 val;
> +	int ret = read_poll_timeout(ufshcd_readl, val, val & UIC_COMMAND_READY,
> +				    500, UIC_CMD_TIMEOUT * 1000, false, hba,
> +				    REG_CONTROLLER_STATUS);
> +	return ret == 0 ? true : false;

Could use a comment in the code.

And perhaps the following is neater:

	u32 val;

	return !read_poll_timeout(ufshcd_readl, val, val & UIC_COMMAND_READY,
				  500, UIC_CMD_TIMEOUT * 1000, false, hba,
				  REG_CONTROLLER_STATUS);

>  }
>  
>  /**