From: "Peter Wang (王信友)" <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
To: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"jejb@linux.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
"avri.altman@sandisk.com" <avri.altman@sandisk.com>,
"bvanassche@acm.org" <bvanassche@acm.org>,
"alim.akhtar@samsung.com" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: "quic_asutoshd@guicinc.com" <quic_asutoshd@guicinc.com>,
"Alice Chao (趙珮均)" <Alice.Chao@mediatek.com>,
"Eddie Huang (黃智傑)" <eddie.huang@mediatek.com>,
"CC Chou (周志杰)" <cc.chou@mediatek.com>,
"Ed Tsai (蔡宗軒)" <Ed.Tsai@mediatek.com>,
wsd_upstream <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
"Chaotian Jing (井朝天)" <Chaotian.Jing@mediatek.com>,
"Chun-Hung Wu (巫駿宏)" <Chun-hung.Wu@mediatek.com>,
"Naomi Chu (朱詠田)" <Naomi.Chu@mediatek.com>,
"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
"Tun-yu Yu (游敦聿)" <Tun-yu.Yu@mediatek.com>,
"quic_cang@guicinc.com" <quic_cang@guicinc.com>,
"Light Hsieh (謝明燈)" <Light.Hsieh@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ufs: core: decouple CQE processing from spinlock critical section
Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 08:13:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d359319927f808dffa0aef52b03c437f803335e.camel@mediatek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <382f6d79-c877-4dc8-813b-ee91ac5489f9@acm.org>
On Thu, 2026-05-14 at 09:22 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 5/14/26 1:26 AM, peter.wang@mediatek.com wrote:
> > 4. In both ufshcd_mcq_compl_all_cqes_lock() and
> > ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock(), snapshot the starting CQE pointer
> > before
> > advancing the head slot under the spinlock, then process the
> > collected
> > CQEs after releasing the lock using the new helper.
>
> This can't work reliably. ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() may be called
> concurrently from different CPU cores, e.g. from a UFS completion
> interrupt and from ufshcd_poll(). Processing CQEs without holding
> hwq->cq_lock may lead to overwriting of CQEs before these have been
> processed.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
Hi Bart,
This is not an issue because the CQ head is protected by cq_lock.
Only the CQEs from head to tail will be processed by ufshcd_poll
or the ISR. The main difference is that these CQEs will be
processed later, without holding the cq_lock.
Thanks
Peter
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-15 8:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-14 8:26 [PATCH v1] ufs: core: decouple CQE processing from spinlock critical section peter.wang
2026-05-14 16:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-05-15 8:13 ` Peter Wang (王信友) [this message]
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=3d359319927f808dffa0aef52b03c437f803335e.camel@mediatek.com \
--to=peter.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=Alice.Chao@mediatek.com \
--cc=Chaotian.Jing@mediatek.com \
--cc=Chun-hung.Wu@mediatek.com \
--cc=Ed.Tsai@mediatek.com \
--cc=Light.Hsieh@mediatek.com \
--cc=Naomi.Chu@mediatek.com \
--cc=Tun-yu.Yu@mediatek.com \
--cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
--cc=avri.altman@sandisk.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=cc.chou@mediatek.com \
--cc=eddie.huang@mediatek.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=quic_asutoshd@guicinc.com \
--cc=quic_cang@guicinc.com \
--cc=wsd_upstream@mediatek.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox