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 B85F8335563; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 16:54:50 +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=1762966493; cv=none; b=fdxOAD4FBmVHpJ2E3erZgjcTRbcWtq8zkg4NRvSJEz+1QPnWpU4Yacdp47e/E23LmvHd4Aj59MXu9MgqXWp31TBiqIGby5bgXd65Ytxt8gYsJS0EwzavoBhUhWLica8SideyznQvWfeplfS4+VwEp0XyxLkLhtcOsXNyLePVpMU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762966493; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VD8a4SS0yMO53+ZVV1cx5tlNfRvslXgHHNGKFKMUuYY=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=acwNI6BchfoEGToIU1XD9tVyBqtZiS1pqGrfPcuxe3Zz/XV27jf535celGnv3wbaAnnGmiAokIwAID9qI/gFBa5JAJbihfpNOIddu2VrXyI7GaZMArjz/hnOib3vclmcbVwhPO/xIcPYm+FaLs2ZBtT077plD/OsypyH8g5eIas= 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=z4xQD0O3; 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="z4xQD0O3" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 004.mia.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4d68Ym0zQkzm0yQW; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 16:51:24 +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=1762966282; x=1765558283; bh=VD8a4SS0yMO53+ZVV1cx5tlN fRvslXgHHNGKFKMUuYY=; b=z4xQD0O3nCJBMEpVijbOigC1jYOrKfDT7TZfyFTM HJeTrRpdDiuKh7RyvI5J0osFC8eL6P0eaCYWgdVAm1VTYBPf30t5kReE2TtAOdUe mvCSXJTkYWBfD6dRRDiTteaIQ1/71sJqUG/5sQFKSeFC2vOAZ5s7OE3s/Z1DPfb7 UPkmH3OfzEG05CKo2p10OGqZ9nXrBrUqOL6E1pQhyw8cMxN2UZLMKETKmBA1Xo/s RG1Aer/CpbKrOk9ZITR5GssteDdAPabel266+cNMxl5cU0Hi+289CAtGBTP3AxUw wR7i1oGoTqKl3xVSNj0UVs9sQaST/AbTrdanQ2dYuhia0Q== 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 hzMhZbm0qqQ4; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 16:51:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [100.119.48.131] (unknown [104.135.180.219]) (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 4d68Yb5grLzm0yQB; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 16:51:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1bf9f247-8cd7-400e-a5c8-6f3936927dfc@acm.org> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:51:13 -0800 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] UFS: Make TM command timeout configurable from host side To: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0ZXIgV2FuZyAo546L5L+h5Y+LKQ==?= , "beanhuo@micron.com" , "sh043.lee@samsung.com" , "avri.altman@wdc.com" , "storage.sec@samsung.com" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "alim.akhtar@samsung.com" , "adrian.hunter@intel.com" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" References: <20251106012654.4094-1-sh043.lee@samsung.com> <009401dc52e7$5d042cf0$170c86d0$@samsung.com> <8d239f26e1011eee49b7c678ba07fd4d9ca81d24.camel@mediatek.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <8d239f26e1011eee49b7c678ba07fd4d9ca81d24.camel@mediatek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/11/25 6:58 PM, Peter Wang (=E7=8E=8B=E4=BF=A1=E5=8F=8B) wrote: > Using a module parameter is a flexible method if the customer > is using a device that may require an extended timeout value. Introducing a new kernel module parameter for a timeout that depends on the UFS device model doesn't sound ideal to me. Can't we increase the default timeout (TM_CMD_TIMEOUT)? Increasing the=20 default timeout shouldn't affect any configuration negatively, isn't it? Thanks, Bart.