From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 011.lax.mailroute.net (011.lax.mailroute.net [199.89.1.14]) (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 D385F306B1B for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2026 22:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769466474; cv=none; b=E0EOsQo3WPQTHrjaDpD8d4DaFqfLVNeynLij9wP4xHw1hTfyPF8d+7okPo3i632C/LRppX71IiU9Ekz5ng6ZWwr2yz1cY9np2/bwMBkELbsKqpvyophkgrzu2myeVI/DvNXjRUfmnfKPJpqkDCa967qVY3MtGEExl0JSsCvra6k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769466474; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lFwO/XRKtNMnypPwC5IHo/imhAP9FHFENLVsrZ5m9B4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=ZMfkgK9wJT8eCJPgQDrzSVvjEGcp1OO4hnYQLxbyhiZY2TMNGw8hr+6ZUOXb/txhySlI4fkRMctZ4FnSbVK7JlQCjBIZ3UHH3J3xXlgn5/+fYcFPSgUnLUjsEcKU+z3EoX2408gAS2QR/I54G0cXEZnklsIewcg6XO3yVx98vK8= 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=MhfJ+2Mp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.14 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="MhfJ+2Mp" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 011.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4f0NTN2hV4z1XLwWp; Mon, 26 Jan 2026 22:27:52 +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=1769466470; x=1772058471; bh=lFwO/XRKtNMnypPwC5IHo/im hAP9FHFENLVsrZ5m9B4=; b=MhfJ+2MpdmWxsG9J6GTCLD2+SxkUgBjQ/FGgLoEN oDmjTb3aWT2dT9PX5VTbuwHPyiac3RdPP9yzVmZe7R/NnDJHwkhK2v4kVq6Q2wjV Q7tuNtvaqreSdrwB5EPjXEqxhNa9ox+hXIY8YbqDy1R6kirh01W2xnnm75Dby/Lb dsnFoEX70M5W4kXD/uE7W6z61QGcor7KrE9UduyB7WhFqUr5BENY1eAeoXtMnmO9 /UVcislAp2JorVA+FKaQPHCav9EWjl7cfU0iicCXm4XHnOLAUGzS8NrFOkMs3HZe fdziodFAlthmiOzaSxoSqspUMEHMlwDRJLp5gr9rTY0ypA== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 011.lax.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (011.lax [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id URdYttsiJszn; Mon, 26 Jan 2026 22:27:50 +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 011.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4f0NTK58XQz1XM5kD; Mon, 26 Jan 2026 22:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <25f3e3af-5a38-4e86-97c4-80c8fa2a1f90@acm.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 14:27:48 -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 0/7] ufs: Remove the clock gating code To: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0ZXIgV2FuZyAo546L5L+h5Y+LKQ==?= , "mani@kernel.org" Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "nitin.rawat@oss.qualcomm.com" , "alim.akhtar@samsung.com" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" References: <20260116182628.3255116-1-bvanassche@acm.org> <1ebc9a1e-c36e-4d9b-a695-a6153a32e0c0@acm.org> <2798fa37f745f9d91757f5097e158c61f72bc835.camel@mediatek.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <2798fa37f745f9d91757f5097e158c61f72bc835.camel@mediatek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 1/25/26 7:44 PM, Peter Wang (=E7=8E=8B=E4=BF=A1=E5=8F=8B) wrote: > This is true when it comes to power saving, but not when it comes to=20 > performance. UFS resume takes more time than simply turning the > clock on. Hi Peter, It seems to me that there is insufficient consensus to proceed with the current form of this patch series. I will look into moving the clock gating code into the runtime suspend and resume callbacks without affecting the behavior of the UFS driver. Thanks, Bart.