Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] scsi: ufs: introduce vendor isr

From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@gmail.com>
Cc: Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@samsung.com>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	Avri Altman <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	"Bean Huo (beanhuo)" <beanhuo@micron.com>,
	Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	sc.suh@samsung.com, hy50.seo@samsung.com, sh425.lee@samsung.com,
	bhoon95.kim@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] scsi: ufs: introduce vendor isr
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 20:23:01 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f277507b-b62e-c874-b2ad-276ea03d2263@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGOxZ51X-ThsqV35PiTh-awRvAkQ=Fjf9m+KRd1HLZ+pDNi=Xg@mail.gmail.com>

On 9/13/21 10:26, Alim Akhtar wrote:
> Thanks for your input. Completely agree with you, in fact your
> suggestions make sense to me. As a driver developer, surely we can
> take these concerns to the IP designers and see how far we can get in
> terms of standardization. That, however, is not something that can be
> accomplished overnight. My main concern is, what about millions of
> devices which are already in the market? UFS subsystem does support
> _vops_ to handle vendor specific hooks/modifications. I am not saying
> we should always follow this path, but surely until these deviations 
> are either fixed or become part of UFS standard itself, IMO.
Hi Alim,

If there are already millions of devices in the market that support this 
feature then that's an argument to proceed with this patch series.

Thanks,

Bart.