[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <68631d36-6bb2-4389-99c1-288a63c82779@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 08:28:27 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>,
Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>, Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>,
Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v3 3/3] ufs: core: delegate the interrupt service
routine to a threaded irq handler
On 7/21/25 5:04 AM, André Draszik wrote:
> I don't know much about UFS at this stage, but could the code simply
> check for the controller version and revert to original behaviour
> if < v4? Any thoughts on such a change?
I'm not sure that's the best possible solution. A more elegant solution
could be to remove the "if (!hba->mcq_enabled || !hba->mcq_esi_enabled)"
check, to restrict the number of commands completed by
ufshcd_transfer_req_compl() and only to return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD if more
commands are pending than a certain threshold.
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists