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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3D08C2D0D2 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2019 15:46:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF9720643 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2019 15:46:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726246AbfLXPqZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Dec 2019 10:46:25 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-f65.google.com ([209.85.216.65]:36638 "EHLO mail-pj1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726140AbfLXPqZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Dec 2019 10:46:25 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-f65.google.com with SMTP id n59so1370294pjb.1; Tue, 24 Dec 2019 07:46:24 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:autocrypt :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0ui3frYlfiXdTUjqfeUJDp5cIjjrIwzBPWUplqeRkEk=; b=QQFt92c1IJ+xx4bZXrhhHndAwfQVJooeagCsh3DcEO0AcTvUcUyQxn4nn+eVWcefkl 24VS9ehYEKr8GaiMFnj/qGyf3BM9jivwwqrqjzxLhtTRJdbhoZuaGjF8AF72TZDhwy9/ QwvemLQjIuMsgDHvEDViJHpUWIcOHLmGKhKQazQmJFxj56mDZGwjt1e2a2On3oSHy4Eb n84NZ5ZF3YtDYWmipo/o1C8CZoPaY0bvkiVjHCT1UW1ZL1RbVa4PTxAeMX/JrWeaa6FO ++jSLbuT2bI6Su6Xwhh5SyICNG/XXWMyWJwH7xITLkd5wkYFP4lDxzDJTMWUVLQMq4b9 cJ1A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXj6bJCtnLeDIm160ZmuKObL2wVDb4ajDij4Sbvu7JBZmkLGFMg VSgetdFhGUHFzryq87V4LmA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz6iZAH2fqKHGMMuLejkF7qSezx7mDt7SYKF2IxG3sn/bcC/8HKxqA19xeTQtTHJV6egAKYeg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:708c:: with SMTP id z12mr15543251plk.15.1577202384233; Tue, 24 Dec 2019 07:46:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:4000:1206:80fd:a97:a7d:f0c8? ([2601:647:4000:1206:80fd:a97:a7d:f0c8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 199sm30715193pfv.81.2019.12.24.07.46.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 24 Dec 2019 07:46:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] scsi: ufs: unify scsi_block_requests usage To: Stanley Chu , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com, avri.altman@wdc.com, alim.akhtar@samsung.com, pedrom.sousa@synopsys.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com, matthias.bgg@gmail.com Cc: beanhuo@micron.com, cang@codeaurora.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kuohong.wang@mediatek.com, peter.wang@mediatek.com, chun-hung.wu@mediatek.com, andy.teng@mediatek.com References: <1577192466-20762-1-git-send-email-stanley.chu@mediatek.com> <1577192466-20762-2-git-send-email-stanley.chu@mediatek.com> From: Bart Van Assche Autocrypt: addr=bvanassche@acm.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBFSOu4oBCADcRWxVUvkkvRmmwTwIjIJvZOu6wNm+dz5AF4z0FHW2KNZL3oheO3P8UZWr LQOrCfRcK8e/sIs2Y2D3Lg/SL7qqbMehGEYcJptu6mKkywBfoYbtBkVoJ/jQsi2H0vBiiCOy fmxMHIPcYxaJdXxrOG2UO4B60Y/BzE6OrPDT44w4cZA9DH5xialliWU447Bts8TJNa3lZKS1 AvW1ZklbvJfAJJAwzDih35LxU2fcWbmhPa7EO2DCv/LM1B10GBB/oQB5kvlq4aA2PSIWkqz4 3SI5kCPSsygD6wKnbRsvNn2mIACva6VHdm62A7xel5dJRfpQjXj2snd1F/YNoNc66UUTABEB AAG0JEJhcnQgVmFuIEFzc2NoZSA8YnZhbmFzc2NoZUBhY20ub3JnPokBOQQTAQIAIwUCVI67 igIbAwcLCQgHAwIBBhUIAgkKCwQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJEHFcPTXFzhAJ8QkH/1AdXblKL65M Y1Zk1bYKnkAb4a98LxCPm/pJBilvci6boefwlBDZ2NZuuYWYgyrehMB5H+q+Kq4P0IBbTqTa jTPAANn62A6jwJ0FnCn6YaM9TZQjM1F7LoDX3v+oAkaoXuq0dQ4hnxQNu792bi6QyVdZUvKc macVFVgfK9n04mL7RzjO3f+X4midKt/s+G+IPr4DGlrq+WH27eDbpUR3aYRk8EgbgGKvQFdD CEBFJi+5ZKOArmJVBSk21RHDpqyz6Vit3rjep7c1SN8s7NhVi9cjkKmMDM7KYhXkWc10lKx2 RTkFI30rkDm4U+JpdAd2+tP3tjGf9AyGGinpzE2XY1K5AQ0EVI67igEIAKiSyd0nECrgz+H5 PcFDGYQpGDMTl8MOPCKw/F3diXPuj2eql4xSbAdbUCJzk2ETif5s3twT2ER8cUTEVOaCEUY3 eOiaFgQ+nGLx4BXqqGewikPJCe+UBjFnH1m2/IFn4T9jPZkV8xlkKmDUqMK5EV9n3eQLkn5g lco+FepTtmbkSCCjd91EfThVbNYpVQ5ZjdBCXN66CKyJDMJ85HVr5rmXG/nqriTh6cv1l1Js T7AFvvPjUPknS6d+BETMhTkbGzoyS+sywEsQAgA+BMCxBH4LvUmHYhpS+W6CiZ3ZMxjO8Hgc ++w1mLeRUvda3i4/U8wDT3SWuHcB3DWlcppECLkAEQEAAYkBHwQYAQIACQUCVI67igIbDAAK CRBxXD01xc4QCZ4dB/0QrnEasxjM0PGeXK5hcZMT9Eo998alUfn5XU0RQDYdwp6/kMEXMdmT oH0F0xB3SQ8WVSXA9rrc4EBvZruWQ+5/zjVrhhfUAx12CzL4oQ9Ro2k45daYaonKTANYG22y //x8dLe2Fv1By4SKGhmzwH87uXxbTJAUxiWIi1np0z3/RDnoVyfmfbbL1DY7zf2hYXLLzsJR mSsED/1nlJ9Oq5fALdNEPgDyPUerqHxcmIub+pF0AzJoYHK5punqpqfGmqPbjxrJLPJfHVKy goMj5DlBMoYqEgpbwdUYkH6QdizJJCur4icy8GUNbisFYABeoJ91pnD4IGei3MTdvINSZI5e Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 07:46:21 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1577192466-20762-2-git-send-email-stanley.chu@mediatek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019-12-24 05:01, Stanley Chu wrote: > Currently UFS driver has ufshcd_scsi_block_requests() with > reference counter mechanism to avoid possible racing of blocking and > unblocking requests flow. Unify all users in UFS driver to use the > same function. > > Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu > --- > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > index ed02a70..b6b9665 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > @@ -5177,7 +5177,7 @@ static void ufshcd_exception_event_handler(struct work_struct *work) > hba = container_of(work, struct ufs_hba, eeh_work); > > pm_runtime_get_sync(hba->dev); > - scsi_block_requests(hba->host); > + ufshcd_scsi_block_requests(hba); > err = ufshcd_get_ee_status(hba, &status); > if (err) { > dev_err(hba->dev, "%s: failed to get exception status %d\n", > @@ -5191,7 +5191,7 @@ static void ufshcd_exception_event_handler(struct work_struct *work) > ufshcd_bkops_exception_event_handler(hba); > > out: > - scsi_unblock_requests(hba->host); > + ufshcd_scsi_unblock_requests(hba); > pm_runtime_put_sync(hba->dev); > return; > } Hi Stanley, >From the SCSI core: void scsi_block_requests(struct Scsi_Host *shost) { shost->host_self_blocked = 1; } In other words, neither scsi_block_requests() nor ufshcd_scsi_block_requests() wait for ongoing ufshcd_queuecommand() calls to finish. Is it required to wait for these calls to finish before exceptions are handled? If not, can the scsi_block_requests() and scsi_unblock_requests() calls be left out? If it is required to wait for ongoing ufshcd_queuecommand() calls to finish then I think the scsi_block_requests() and scsi_unblock_requests() will have to be changed into something else. Thanks, Bart.