RE: [PATCH v4 1/6] scsi: ufs: wrap the i/o access operations

[Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@samsung.com>]

On Thursday, May 09, 2013, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-05-09 at 12:22 +0530, Santosh Y wrote:
> > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@samsung.com> wrote:
> > > On Thursday, May 09, 2013 Santosh wrote:
> > >> > There are two patches remained. These are applied with your final comments.
> > >> > Do you have any idea?
> > >> > [PATCH v4 5/6] scsi: ufs: add dme configuration primitives
> > >> > [PATCH v4 6/6] scsi: ufs: add dme control primitives
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Since there is no use case for these implementations yet, except for
> > >> ufshcd_get_dme_attr_val(), as per James's suggestion
> > >> [http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org/msg20207.html]
> > >> I did not ACK the patches.
> > >> The same patches can be used to implement related features and resubmit later.
> > > I respect your decision. But I have another opinion.
> > > The remained patches are basic operations which should be supported by ufshcd.
> > > Especially, dme_set/set will be used in vender specific part of host controller rather than in
> ufshcd itself.
> > > And above all, Maya Erez completed to test and reported working fine.
> > > If these patches are merged this time, it would be helpful to various hosts.
> > >
> >
> > I'm ok with merging these patches if James is fine with it. I will ACK
> > the patches.
> 
> Well, no, not really.  The rule is simple: we don't add new functions to
> the kernel without callers.  The reason is also simple: trying to do
> interface first and then user some time later is a "make work"
> development strategy that practically guarantees the interface is either
> never used or needs modification.  From the kernel's point of view,
> which is more important, review of a function with no callers is only
> partial because you've no idea how it will be used.  Whereas if you
> review a function and its callers, you can see how the API works and
> possibly suggest improvements.

Thank you for your feedback.
Okay, it will be reintroduced with actual usage soon.
Could you pick the remains except [5/6, 6/6] into your tree?
The following patches include Santosh's ack.
[PATCH v4 1/6] scsi: ufs: wrap the i/o access operations
[PATCH v4 2/6] scsi: ufs: amend interrupt configuration
[PATCH v4 3/6] scsi: ufs: fix interrupt status clears
[PATCH v4 4/6] scsi: ufs: rework link start-up process

Thanks,
Seungwon Jeon
> 
> James
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html