From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 004.mia.mailroute.net (004.mia.mailroute.net [199.89.3.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 398D51E766F; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 14:55:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.3.7 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753455313; cv=none; b=HNRZuJGI9RCDER1H/S9D4RrTds1IOlXWzz5VEeOyL6al0+85sDmuZnj2jpjGV9Tgbyi3Enl+nAWY7YOWXMNIokS6lCGW05WPJKtBk46/5ARyp2AZHX4UJ4Fv64h/bFnqUlDE7+vwxc6aXd0ohU3KYCJNR7vJj555bKy6U3DBGko= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753455313; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ySsrQyQZsReDOvURUlTKLUyfDDo7OmT+KPfcJMZKqvA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=gbyhAIkcdKHy7gMOsH+16vh8HJLqE7MVlwEHyQyUi7zLUm8mXRCyeBBlvJrztQLmBevGCGm3/ZdGKl23JVtqDNg1d7A9sDGtzuWuBgDJmeV8MiRVRfZAM/w8/k53Wi2A/ygUT1rdv2s2QFiwIA9NCXDlMySXyXv8u0M3yLapvyI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b=oi9+E1QU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.3.7 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b="oi9+E1QU" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 004.mia.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4bpWBK4zvVzm0yVZ; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 14:55:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=acm.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :from:from:content-language:references:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mr01; t=1753455302; x=1756047303; bh=ySsrQyQZsReDOvURUlTKLUyf DDo7OmT+KPfcJMZKqvA=; b=oi9+E1QUrqlM02IzDKeAMW93yVx5BAhLCZCxyAWr kVCKJ/+Gg7jsl3WaWERWTi0fF7nneN6KEAVIXD3T5O7nbX2K0gVS/ZkIER/TTj/Z Sreme/RjmXFL8VPBlh83v7+agKdok12gwiJFK5vOI7T7BvE551NwflZXNO+3mXRa i6FjKdcVYlGjzPML7t9P1Xm8Es1LDVbOGlH1aUkHuV7a80/PxJ0eZJsAjnpcCnNG vRAc+gbG/UnJsmbkDTtz0H7GX52vsKBh/AlwsPqoIErBoq4rRBJEvGkAyjp94Wox 0UBb+rh5/Jm+vyycRdS5kB4Mvf4DNWqUZi+Phslm9ndSog== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 004.mia.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (004.mia [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id a7xvxFBIoncZ; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 14:55:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [100.66.154.22] (unknown [104.135.204.82]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bvanassche@acm.org) by 004.mia.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4bpW9t60Xszm0ySc; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 14:54:41 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1989e794-6539-4875-9e87-518da0715083@acm.org> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 07:54:40 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: ufs: core: Don't perform UFS clkscale if host asyn scan in progress To: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0ZXIgV2FuZyAo546L5L+h5Y+LKQ==?= , "beanhuo@micron.com" , "avri.altman@wdc.com" , "quic_rampraka@quicinc.com" , "quic_cang@quicinc.com" , "quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com" , "quic_nitirawa@quicinc.com" , "quic_ziqichen@quicinc.com" , "neil.armstrong@linaro.org" , "luca.weiss@fairphone.com" , "konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com" , "junwoo80.lee@samsung.com" , "mani@kernel.org" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , =?UTF-8?B?VHplLW5hbiBXdSAo5ZCz5r6k5Y2XKQ==?= , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , "manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org" , "alim.akhtar@samsung.com" , "James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20250522081233.2358565-1-quic_ziqichen@quicinc.com> <5f3911ffd2c09b6d86300c3905e9c760698df069.camel@mediatek.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <5f3911ffd2c09b6d86300c3905e9c760698df069.camel@mediatek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 7/25/25 2:13 AM, Peter Wang (=E7=8E=8B=E4=BF=A1=E5=8F=8B) wrote: > Could consider luns_avail instead mutex? That would be wrong. I think it is essential that scan_mutex is used in this patch. Additionally, the lock inversion is between devfreq->lock and (c->notifiers)->rwsem so it seems unlikely to me that Ziqi's patch is the patch that introduced the reported lock inversion. Bart.