linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v1 2/2] scsi: ufs: qcom: Update the UIC Command Timeout

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 03:18:26 +0000
From: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, "Bao D. Nguyen"
	<quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com>, "quic_cang@...cinc.com" <quic_cang@...cinc.com>,
	"quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com" <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>, "beanhuo@...ron.com"
	<beanhuo@...ron.com>, "adrian.hunter@...el.com" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	"martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
CC: "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, Bjorn Andersson
	<andersson@...nel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, Manivannan
 Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>, "James E.J. Bottomley"
	<jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, "open list:ARM/QUALCOMM SUPPORT"
	<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 2/2] scsi: ufs: qcom: Update the UIC Command Timeout

> On 5/22/24 13:56, Bao D. Nguyen wrote:
> > On 5/22/2024 11:18 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> Since the described issue is only encountered during development, why to
> >> modify the UIC command timeout unconditionally?
> >
> > The vendors can enjoy the default 500ms UIC timeout if they prefer.
> > As long as they don't write to hba->uic_cmd_timeout in the vendor's
> initialization routine, the default value of 500ms will be used.
> 
> Since this issue is not vendor specific, I think it would be better to
> modify the UFSHCI core driver only. Has it been considered to introduce a
> kernel module parameter for setting the UIC command timeout instead of the
> approach of this patch? As you probably know there are multiple mechanisms
> for specifying kernel module parameters, e.g. the bootargs parameter in the
> device tree.
Since the problem statement is "During product development...", why not just a debugfs?

Thanks,
Avri

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.