From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: SEO HOYOUNG <hy50.seo@samsung.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
alim.akhtar@samsung.com, avri.altman@wdc.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, beanhuo@micron.com,
kwangwon.min@samsung.com, kwmad.kim@samsung.com,
sh425.lee@samsung.com, sc.suh@samsung.com,
quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com, cpgs@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] scsi: ufs: core: Process abort completed command in MCQ mode
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2023 09:39:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e1ed8776-d8ad-49f2-bf8f-2759256e33e9@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231101084504.79087-1-hy50.seo@samsung.com>
On 11/1/23 01:45, SEO HOYOUNG wrote:
> In MCQ mode, the case where OCS is updated to aborted is as follows
> 1. when abort processing is completed
> 2. When a duplicate command occurs
What is a "duplicate command"? The UFSHCI driver guarantees that each
SCSI command has a unique tag.
> In case of 1 situation, cmd should be re-request.
It should be resubmitted by the SCSI error handler. The UFSHCI driver
does not have to request this explicitly. See also the code at the end
of scmd_eh_abort_handler().
> case OCS_ABORTED:
> - result |= DID_ABORT << 16;
> + if (cqe)
> + eec = le32_to_cpu(cqe->status) & MASK_EEC;
> +
> + if (is_mcq_enabled(hba) && !eec)
> + result |= DID_REQUEUE << 16;
> + else
> + result |= DID_ABORT << 16;
> break;
I don't think this change is necessary. Additionally, introducing
different behavior for MCQ compared to legacy mode in this code path is
suspicious. Why should how commands are queued affect how aborts are
processed?
Thanks,
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-01 16:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20231101084246epcas2p32ae15219878d1c31e7d8a14c22489519@epcas2p3.samsung.com>
2023-11-01 8:45 ` [PATCH v1] scsi: ufs: core: Process abort completed command in MCQ mode SEO HOYOUNG
2023-11-01 16:39 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2023-11-02 4:07 ` hoyoung seo
2023-11-02 19:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-11-06 4:56 ` hoyoung seo
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=e1ed8776-d8ad-49f2-bf8f-2759256e33e9@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
--cc=avri.altman@wdc.com \
--cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
--cc=cpgs@samsung.com \
--cc=hy50.seo@samsung.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kwangwon.min@samsung.com \
--cc=kwmad.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com \
--cc=sc.suh@samsung.com \
--cc=sh425.lee@samsung.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