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 1A017C2C9; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 15:37:37 +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=1753889860; cv=none; b=iW+Swx4iat8Lfj5YzGO2Bc7+gLW03s+r0MbpNU9jPgLnYNsAi4sjAARx+bBaQt+G0g6O7ATEy1lzIqrbmb2NZDordEhbP9LjbQJooXDkFltqebrbkgdQN4QLQsjxBaMp/XsWhAuKhtuEYqErkljictHA6GtxL5Obc6UmZieXUdY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753889860; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/08/JQ8jZ9IlnfZdfiNfeRjirnvij0n8cFhhiZl/oVs=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=tzPu1JOiEHZaY0GiP82cRFemPlqQxK161roZlIFA2EhC1gOm4QN4siJ9rGVFgQf+z/mQ/GOLYy6mVQlF6e+uTAB+nZ7cdi+SbunlmHD6DUuIOOMLcJHW4brV5fivYkg6JMtL5BXcIM30X4A6v7BU/oqeOWf8z0MumoBl7SRayv4= 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=3m9MtMxp; 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="3m9MtMxp" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 004.mia.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4bsbv46c4nzm0yTl; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 15:37:36 +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=1753889853; x=1756481854; bh=/08/JQ8jZ9IlnfZdfiNfeRji rnvij0n8cFhhiZl/oVs=; b=3m9MtMxp1hPrVknBcoBAkX9bW88wD3+GfUnb2PQd IaIgdjGmXL7MOuIOS1nncc7WHeTSY1ymxrb5g3rBWcBl/iU7HnJvdbNQLbAAu9yo nTOOx+v2qr6svbvxScR3LM4whHjPVkXPCUIkM23fs/9tYJdNYGWfhj6fQKryT13D /SjdhvDJ4DSzEerx6DRGgO0CaHWcG8m6da8KQLJDQHnXUE9dw7YJz3CTh3HdiWC3 y1ABNFcalzQNVMTshzuw2xEC1LsdifwxwGIf0ykbpsOkyLMg849EKLsa9pTFm1RF YQ4h5kMQNYblKLhedAiz5Mx8uVCZ13D81uluFrOVK0wVXQ== 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 RyMtXEfdku89; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 15:37:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [100.66.154.22] (unknown [104.135.204.82]) (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 4bsbtk32Znzm0xjy; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 15:37:17 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 08:37:16 -0700 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 v4] scsi: ufs: core: Don't perform UFS clkscale if host asyn scan in progress To: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0ZXIgV2FuZyAo546L5L+h5Y+LKQ==?= , "beanhuo@micron.com" , "avri.altman@wdc.com" , "neil.armstrong@linaro.org" , "quic_cang@quicinc.com" , "quic_nitirawa@quicinc.com" , "quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com" , "quic_ziqichen@quicinc.com" , "luca.weiss@fairphone.com" , "konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com" , "mani@kernel.org" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" , "quic_rampraka@quicinc.com" , "junwoo80.lee@samsung.com" Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , =?UTF-8?B?VHplLW5hbiBXdSAo5ZCz5r6k5Y2XKQ==?= , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , "manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org" , "alim.akhtar@samsung.com" , "James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20250522081233.2358565-1-quic_ziqichen@quicinc.com> <5f3911ffd2c09b6d86300c3905e9c760698df069.camel@mediatek.com> <1989e794-6539-4875-9e87-518da0715083@acm.org> <10b41d77c287393d4f6e50e712c3713839cb6a8c.camel@mediatek.com> <673e1960-f911-451d-ab18-3dc30abddd79@quicinc.com> <418bfbe4bfb3f04e805af8fa667144f148787aeb.camel@mediatek.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <418bfbe4bfb3f04e805af8fa667144f148787aeb.camel@mediatek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 7/30/25 5:55 AM, Peter Wang (=E7=8E=8B=E4=BF=A1=E5=8F=8B) wrote: > However, in theory, this issue should still be solvable > without using a lock. > Another idea is to only start ufshcd_devfreq_init > when shost->async_scan =3D 0. Does the lockdep complaint mentioned in this email thread occur on multiple platforms or only on MediaTek platforms? I don't see any lockdep complaints with Martin's SCSI for-next branch on my development platform. If this warning only occurs on MediaTek platforms, why to modify the UFSHCI core driver to eliminate this lockdep complaint? Thanks, Bart.