[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b1e4207586a7b6bc1dbaef69627eb5c6b8e956db.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2024 13:50:55 +0100
From: Bean Huo <huobean@...il.com>
To: liuderong@...o.com, alim.akhtar@...sung.com, avri.altman@....com,
bvanassche@....org, James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, peter.wang@...iatek.com,
manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org, ahalaney@...hat.com, beanhuo@...ron.com,
quic_mnaresh@...cinc.com
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi:ufs:core: update compl_time_stamp_local_clock
after complete a cqe
On Wed, 2024-12-04 at 19:50 +0800, liuderong@...o.com wrote:
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> index 6a26853..bd70fe1 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> @@ -5519,6 +5519,7 @@ void ufshcd_compl_one_cqe(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> int task_tag,
>
> lrbp = &hba->lrb[task_tag];
> lrbp->compl_time_stamp = ktime_get();
> + lrbp->compl_time_stamp_local_clock = local_clock();
probably, we should change lrbp->compl_time_stamp = ktime_get(); to
lrbp->compl_time_stamp = local_clock(); also, the name of
compl_time_stamp_local_clock, is so long, should be shorter.
but the patch is ok to me:
Reviewed-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists