linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: core: increase the NOP

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <006f01db6e27$768291d0$6387b570$@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:16:10 +0900
From: "DooHyun Hwang" <dh0421.hwang@...sung.com>
To: "'Bao D. Nguyen'" <quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com>, "'Avri Altman'"
	<Avri.Altman@....com>, <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
	<bvanassche@....org>, <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	<martin.petersen@...cle.com>, <peter.wang@...iatek.com>,
	<manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>, <quic_mnaresh@...cinc.com>
Cc: <grant.jung@...sung.com>, <jt77.jang@...sung.com>,
	<junwoo80.lee@...sung.com>, <jangsub.yi@...sung.com>,
	<sh043.lee@...sung.com>, <cw9316.lee@...sung.com>,
	<sh8267.baek@...sung.com>, <wkon.kim@...sung.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: core: increase the NOP_OUT command timeout

On 1/16/2025 8:30 AM, Bao D. Nguyen wrote:
> On 1/16/2025 1:59 AM, DooHyun Hwang wrote:
> >>
> >>> It is found that is UFS device may take longer than 500ms(50ms *
> >>> 10times) to respond to NOP_OUT command.
> >>>
> >>> The NOP_OUT command timeout was total 500ms that is from a timeout
> >>> value of 50ms(defined by NOP_OUT_TIMEOUT) with 10 retries(defined by
> >>> NOP_OUT_RETRIES)
> >>>
> >>> This change increase the NOP_OUT command timeout to total 1000ms by
> >>> changing timeout value to 100ms(NOP_OUT_TIMEOUT)
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: DooHyun Hwang <dh0421.hwang@...sung.com>
> >> Why not edit hba->nop_out_timeout in the .init vop?
> >> Like some vendors already do.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Avri
> >>
> > Thank you for your suggestion.
> > I'll fix that in .init vop as you said.
> >
> > And I'll reject this patch.
> Hi DooHyun Hwang,
> Since this is a common issue that multiple platform vendors have to fix in
> their vops, should we fix it in the common code instead?
> 
> Reviewed-by: Bao D. Nguyen <quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com>


This is already set to rejected state on patchwork.
Anyway, thank you for the review.

I thought it would be efficient to fix it in the common code.
I don't know which UFS devices have the same problem.

Thank you.
DooHyun Hwang.