linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 3/5] scsi: ufs: core: Remove unused ufshcd_res

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

Message-ID: <79555a86-d434-414f-bafc-be311a92482c@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 08:18:12 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>,
 Ram Kumar Dwivedi <quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com>, andersson@...nel.org,
 konradybcio@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
 conor+dt@...nel.org, mani@...nel.org, James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
 martin.petersen@...cle.com
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/5] scsi: ufs: core: Remove unused ufshcd_res_info
 structure

On 01/09/2025 18:08, Nitin Rawat wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/21/2025 5:18 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 21/08/2025 13:24, Ram Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
>>> From: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
>>>
>>> Remove the ufshcd_res_info structure and associated enum ufshcd_res
>>> definitions from the UFS host controller header. These were previously
>>> used for MCQ resource mapping but are no longer needed following recent
>>> refactoring to use direct base addresses instead of multiple separate
>>> resource regions
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
>>
>> Incomplete SoB chain.
>>
>> But anyway this makes no sense as independent patch. First you remove
>> users of it making it redundant... and then you remove it? No.
> 
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> The driver changes are in the UFS Qualcomm platform driver, which uses 
> the definitions, while ufshcd.h is part of the UFS core driver. Hence 
> kept in 2 separate patch.
Don't explain the obvious but address the comment. I am going to repeat
since you just respond whatever:

This makes no sense as independent patch. First you remove
users of it making it redundant... and then you remove it? No.

Best regards,
Krzysztof