From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz" <jorge.ramirez@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ufs: rpmb: retry power-on UNIT ATTENTION on the RPMB WLUN
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 22:01:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260715220142.916F41F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260715214327.1933560-2-jorge.ramirez@oss.qualcomm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The code uses SCMD_FAILURE_ASC_ANY to retry any Unit Attention, contradicting the documented intent.
- [Low] The 'sshdr' variable is allocated and passed to scsi_execute_cmd but is never used by the caller.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH 1/2] ufs: rpmb: retry power-on UNIT ATTENTION on the RPMB WLUN ---
commit 7f3e584cbe66720f776d9dd47015f86621c3fdb8
Author: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez@oss.qualcomm.com>
ufs: rpmb: retry power-on UNIT ATTENTION on the RPMB WLUN
After a power cycle, the first command to the RPMB WLUN fails with a
power-on UNIT ATTENTION. This patch asks the SCSI core to retry this
condition so RPMB works immediately after boot.
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-rpmb.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-rpmb.c
> index ffad049872b9a..adbec80cf3811 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-rpmb.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-rpmb.c
> @@ -40,6 +40,25 @@ struct ufs_rpmb_dev {
> static int ufs_sec_submit(struct ufs_hba *hba, u16 spsp, void *buffer, size_t len, bool send)
> {
> struct scsi_device *sdev = hba->ufs_rpmb_wlun;
> + struct scsi_sense_hdr sshdr;
[Severity: Low]
Does this code need to allocate and pass sshdr?
It appears that sshdr is passed to scsi_execute_cmd() via exec_args but the
result is never read by the caller. Leaving .sshdr as NULL would avoid the
unnecessary sense data normalization overhead in scsi_execute_cmd().
> + /* Retry the power-on UNIT ATTENTION (ASC 0x29); the SCSI core does not. */
> + struct scsi_failure failure_defs[] = {
> + {
> + .sense = UNIT_ATTENTION,
> + .asc = SCMD_FAILURE_ASC_ANY,
[Severity: Medium]
Will this retry ANY Unit Attention condition instead of just ASC 0x29?
The commit message and inline comment explicitly target the power-on
UNIT ATTENTION (ASC 0x29), but using SCMD_FAILURE_ASC_ANY configures the SCSI
core to retry any Unit Attention condition up to 3 times. Could this mask
other unexpected device state changes?
> + .ascq = SCMD_FAILURE_ASCQ_ANY,
> + .allowed = 3,
> + .result = SAM_STAT_CHECK_CONDITION,
> + },
> + {}
> + };
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260715214327.1933560-1-jorge.ramirez@oss.qualcomm.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-15 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-15 21:39 ufs: rpmb: make RPMB usable with OP-TEE key derivation Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz
2026-07-15 21:39 ` Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz via OP-TEE
2026-07-15 21:39 ` [PATCH 1/2] ufs: rpmb: retry power-on UNIT ATTENTION on the RPMB WLUN Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz
2026-07-15 21:39 ` Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz via OP-TEE
2026-07-15 22:01 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-15 21:39 ` [PATCH 2/2] ufs: rpmb: use a fixed-length RPMB dev_id Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz
2026-07-15 21:39 ` Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz via OP-TEE
2026-07-15 22:00 ` sashiko-bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260715220142.916F41F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=jorge.ramirez@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.