Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] scsi: ufshpb: Add host control mode support to rsp_upiu

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 11:24:04AM +0000, Avri Altman wrote:
>  
> > 
> > On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 10:30:00AM +0200, Avri Altman wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshpb.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshpb.h
> > > index afeb6365daf8..5ec4023db74d 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshpb.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshpb.h
> > > @@ -48,6 +48,11 @@ enum UFSHPB_MODE {
> > >       HPB_DEVICE_CONTROL,
> > >  };
> > >
> > > +enum HPB_RGN_FLAGS {
> > > +     RGN_FLAG_UPDATE = 0,
> > > +     RGN_FLAG_DIRTY,
> > > +};
> > > +
> > >  enum UFSHPB_STATE {
> > >       HPB_PRESENT = 1,
> > >       HPB_SUSPEND,
> > > @@ -109,6 +114,7 @@ struct ufshpb_region {
> > >
> > >       /* below information is used by lru */
> > >       struct list_head list_lru_rgn;
> > > +     unsigned long rgn_flags;
> > 
> > Why an unsigned long for a simple enumerated type?  And why not make
> > this "type safe" by explicitly saying this is an enumerated type
> > variable?
> I am using it for atomic bit operations.

That's not obvious given you have an enumerated type above.  Seems like
an odd mix...