From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFC44C433F5 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 23:04:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242724AbiCaXGC (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:06:02 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44884 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S242718AbiCaXGA (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2022 19:06:00 -0400 Received: from esa6.hgst.iphmx.com (esa6.hgst.iphmx.com [216.71.154.45]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97E391925A2 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 16:04:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=wdc.com; i=@wdc.com; q=dns/txt; s=dkim.wdc.com; t=1648767853; x=1680303853; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tucNaCUnD64doiDrH2VZYUE5jsE6WjQSguxgWFjc2AM=; b=aSiluPDsv0C6UKVK2OTXVAXA0hoITveRikWSveafe2l3jAy1Rjmc488m CBJugqVD2o5jLQ9Bu177YAusfZwnzKu9uxgeKMSTerS6rupnsYUaaCesO CHdHt2O1z68Eco4g0fIgKAfOz2w8Peh4TMFSuDjfBV9R9gBlYMrv2S0AL vVaPiSruUeJ3MyRzgaPvNjD5UnCEvOiVaCzf5enLrWU8OH/o1Q6T57ntE TG4JERZ9j+hoU0jjk7GJvBtSDStUWH67AH8v2oy8jbH1F8nLXQit8W4kl HHnfv2GLIP24gwPL+0yc9JDdcKC+5ZxZZH5Pvjdf6D/JwoXdUtQ8774J3 g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,225,1643644800"; d="scan'208";a="197688847" Received: from uls-op-cesaip02.wdc.com (HELO uls-op-cesaep02.wdc.com) ([199.255.45.15]) by ob1.hgst.iphmx.com with ESMTP; 01 Apr 2022 07:04:11 +0800 IronPort-SDR: u+D7LY4mb9GKzBAEceVHGdQNSkuOzE7AdSzil++9uf/yR4y+Rcsd13PJdQLStVmSiZh9eoSau2 rimJNpzIo5vD3EbySgl10JIk422GOYoGKLPGWBgcH6X+EtxZEQFYoIW/gKx5U7E+D0H187HHSg GhBpTQwPwA+fFI7KFF0dNcetQO8k9skIGdpuxA8Li/DHCBTJ2rMS7xBVTv4sR/9Scqs2TiOZw1 xENCm6jgl4ojI2qfzAlYNmfMZGLOryEyGNpWXqYONJtNAE15vpCpDeLgt3C7QjD6IJa3Gck8kz 7nB2LO63aJpQ+VFwyCrVOwen Received: from uls-op-cesaip01.wdc.com ([10.248.3.36]) by uls-op-cesaep02.wdc.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256; 31 Mar 2022 15:34:58 -0700 IronPort-SDR: ka8QPexfILRze2EwgNOOMs7S6/7TUzyPiboWQ3MVlbDT9Lu+972sgoMVSG4jep6y41HWr052ul N83TV2ryV4/pBc6JnYn/8ImhRzNho7I+xYK4dr34nasQomxwc12859PW1P+RzW2iB3s1REmdiF FrbeYdCLAnri9Y/Q5gxOAE+LVtcym8x7VT6NcllqaETruLuvqjw+4Q8//F1h3No6bOOoiHCNfG XC1PK+UNo38POySsqCMO0DCwKN9KClHounMH4Uc+iq7nF3gUkPNjCXQXVbW2NyDW8jo7hDqp/r sEs= WDCIronportException: Internal Received: from usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com ([10.3.10.180]) by uls-op-cesaip01.wdc.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256; 31 Mar 2022 16:04:10 -0700 Received: from usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com [127.0.0.1]) by usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4KTzQ200hLz1SVnx for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 16:04:09 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass reason="pass (just generated, assumed good)" header.d=opensource.wdc.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d= opensource.wdc.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :in-reply-to:organization:from:references:to:content-language :subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id; s=dkim; t= 1648767849; x=1651359850; bh=tucNaCUnD64doiDrH2VZYUE5jsE6WjQSgux gWFjc2AM=; b=A/bFKKl+a7d7ND+7qicmHRuI3H/QVGVym6kET2Hawf/02mK1BrP r45lOiz4r9wiW574prdunX7jjM670bu6YZZm5vfYA35uGY5hpUcbO6StQo4Z2AHh sZoOdfYWDb61fNb7ITw4orHCCLzFQQavdZe2GGGcOrX23L/SfhZgegwPDnHf0L73 hUOX3e76uhb4VeeSIhXOQFmb94ee+/YKHo7GZq59xwF6tB1PoHnCRRCwiONgrBVw //2pq31nxOqs3RI73j/MVTEPsZky8ZhHraqvUrAZ0We/65nAqfOWd2K7oqPQ2ABL 735rURjEnvDL2/MoRg2RkSKx7Jyy2C1uKDg== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com Received: from usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com ([127.0.0.1]) by usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id xktQui40lFGn for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 16:04:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.225.163.121] (unknown [10.225.163.121]) by usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4KTzQ03Q8zz1Rvlx; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 16:04:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <22f69d9a-7d0d-a408-70b3-11295f14b82d@opensource.wdc.com> Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 08:04:07 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] ata: ahci: Skip 200 ms debounce delay for AMD 300 Series Chipset SATA Controller Content-Language: en-US To: Paul Menzel Cc: Mario Limonciello , Hans de Goede , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Nehal-bakulchandra Shah References: <20220321212431.13717-1-pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de> <20220321212431.13717-3-pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de> <5fb6af7b-d84f-cbae-7eb1-543f3a7e53e4@molgen.mpg.de> From: Damien Le Moal Organization: Western Digital Research In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On 3/31/22 23:42, Paul Menzel wrote: > Dear Damien, >=20 >=20 > Am 23.03.22 um 09:36 schrieb Paul Menzel: >=20 >> Am 23.03.22 um 09:24 schrieb Damien Le Moal: >>> On 3/23/22 15:55, Paul Menzel wrote: >> >>>> Am 23.03.22 um 06:01 schrieb Damien Le Moal: >>>>> On 3/22/22 06:51, Limonciello, Mario wrote: >> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Paul Menzel >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 16:25 >>>> >>>> [=E2=80=A6] >>>> >>>>>> I seem to recall that we were talking about trying to drop the=20 >>>>>> debounce delay for everything, weren't we? >>>>>> >>>>>> So perhaps it would be right to add a 4th patch in the series to d= o >>>>>> just that. Then If this turns out to be problematic for >>>>>> anything other than the controllers in the series that you >>>>>> identified as not problematic then that 4th patch can >>>>>> potentially be reverted alone? >>>>> >>>>> Not quite everything :) But you are right, let's try to switch the=20 >>>>> default to no delay. I will be posting patches today for that. >>>>> With these patches, your patches are not necessary anymore as the A= MD >>>>> chipset falls under the default no-delay. >>>> >>>> I am all for improving the situation for all devices, but I am unabl= e to >>>> judge the regression potential of changing this, as it affects a lot= of >>>> devices. I guess it=E2=80=99d would go through the next tree, and ho= pefully the >>>> company QA teams can give it a good spin. I hoped that my patches, a= s I >>>> have tested them, and AMD will hopefully too, could go into the curr= ent >>>> merge window. >>> >>> Yes, correct, the plan is to get the generic series queued as soon >>> as rc1 so that it can spend plenty of time in linux-next for people >>> to test. That will hopefully reduce the risk of breaking things in >>> the field. Same for the default LPM change. >> >> But 5.18 or 5.19? If 5.18, sounds good to me, if 5.19, I=E2=80=99d be = great if=20 >> my patches go into 5.18 cycle, as they have been tested, and it would=20 >> mean the whole change gets tested more widely already. >> >>> With the default removal of the debounce delay, your patches addressi= ng >>> only the AMD adapter are not needed anymore: this adapter will not ha= ve a >>> debounce delay unless the ATA_LFLAG_DEBOUNCE_DELAY flag is set. >> >> Yes, I understand. >=20 > The merge window for Linux 5.18 is going to close in three days this=20 > Sunday. It=E2=80=99d be really great if my patches, tested on hardware,= could go=20 > into that. >=20 >>>>> It would be nice if you can test though. >>>> >>>> Of course, I am going to that either way. >>> >>> Series posted with you on CC. Please test ! >> >> Thank you. I am going to test it in the coming days, and report back. >> >> Maybe more people should be put in Cc (Dell, Lenovo, IBM, x86 subsyste= m)=20 >> with a request to test this? > Thank you for the patches, which are a big improvement. Let=E2=80=99s h= ope, you=20 > can re-roll them, so they get into Linux very soon for everyone=E2=80=99= s benefit. I am waiting for 5.18-rc1 to rebase the patches and re-post them. Given reviewed-by and tested-by tags, I will queue them for 5.19. With that in mind, I am not planning to apply your previous patches for 5.18, as they would conflict and would only end up being churn since the delay removal by default will undo your changes. --=20 Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research