linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] scsi: ufs: dt-bindings: Document UFS Disable LPM property

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: <8ebe4439-eab8-456a-ac91-b53956eab633@quicinc.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 09:45:49 +0530
From: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        <avri.altman@....com>, <bvanassche@....org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        <robh@...nel.org>, <mani@...nel.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>, <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        <beanhuo@...ron.com>, <peter.wang@...iatek.com>
CC: <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] scsi: ufs: dt-bindings: Document UFS Disable LPM
 property



On 5/7/2025 8:34 PM, Nitin Rawat wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/6/2025 11:46 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 06/05/2025 18:37, Nitin Rawat wrote:
>>> Disable UFS low power mode on emulation FPGA platforms or other 
>>> platforms
>>
>> Why wouldn't you like to test LPM also on FPGA designs? I do not see
>> here correlation.
> 
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> Since the FPGA platform doesn't support UFS Low Power Modes (such as the 
> AutoHibern8 feature specified in the UFS specification), I have included 
> this information in the hardware description (i.e dts).


Hi Krzysztof,

Could you please share your thoughts on my above comment? If you still 
see concerns, I may need to consider other options like modparam.

Regards,
Nitin

> 
> Thanks,
> Nitin
> 
>>
>>> where it is either unsupported or power efficiency is not a critical
>>> requirement.
>>
>> That's a policy, not hardware, thus not suitable for DT.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> 
>