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 82F2847A872; Sat, 12 Sep 2026 13:38:12 +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=1789220294; cv=none; b=ijnb2nSLbAXK/xJxa8QMs7eDCB0+w6K1sPWL0auQtqw8tjRskv34Zajqdi9mzkAewsvXxAqttY59NkuE72gyp3lwWVBkHdmH+85d0WVrSPhQTNNU1sVkmb+Agpe5yKczaEHxnRHaa/5m0HSjMFAAlULuDQTU1+9CZJsgJorTkkw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789220294; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RTJWQPVnP2cOgXsP4ClBmG+cOVJE5siN7LC/E44GvyE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=e/yZc04xk0C+PJFHxdQXwSeAtE6qlcqkq/Py0rthuZrmTWFzWrUfQ8MA3EHZJu5pVuvUGwGiu7dunrz0jqXIHx6PyfDTT7qZrJbqJVOCx7F5n9kETO8geOuLDi+yNU9PFtzrHtrfN0qVuwNqbeaUyYzBAJ/TA1COwd70c4DNfdc= 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=kylMEAS/; 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="kylMEAS/" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 011.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4hhstW3k24z1XM4Tn; Sat, 12 Sep 2026 13:38:11 +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=1789220282; x=1791812283; bh=RTJWQPVnP2cOgXsP4ClBmG+c OVJE5siN7LC/E44GvyE=; b=kylMEAS/uohEmArHVY5mu2GljCVVBZEG8faduRUp cv1Ez/x1NhcE7opQCNoneTYveQnTM6n4ivZJlYeCCi5MfApFihkf5Lv5arA8d+ua 5C9Zyua1Mdv3dKU03I7PsXGIUEBD0J5EEM0tzG74Jwv5pzaENkoMgl+oHfuncZ7l +qTJTUUYnk3YbRi8gM6P7UQ9ED7uzWDfLnOSd8vKR9u2scuDkdYwqievv88QzQ6O DBflHp3acTkqXHWkXZtYIZ+mQh71t7Ec9QJSHzms9YRyXCB1tYuOBN8X/I9UvTsW 3t0AZSBop7GqbkvbQMXa1oAzFnLqrzeCvdaBiBItIz3LXg== 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 4OGwJAQrYKY2; Sat, 12 Sep 2026 13:38:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.51.14] (c-24-6-239-25.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.6.239.25]) (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 4hhstC2kndz1XM4Sx; Sat, 12 Sep 2026 13:37:54 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 06:37:53 -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 RFC] drivers/rufs: add Rust UFS host controller driver To: Andreas Hindborg , James Bottomley , Greg KH , jaemyung.lee@samsung.com Cc: Miguel Ojeda , Boqun Feng , Gary Guo , =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Roy_Baron?= , Benno Lossin , Alice Ryhl , Trevor Gross , Danilo Krummrich , Daniel Almeida , Tamir Duberstein , Alexandre Courbot , =?UTF-8?Q?Onur_=C3=96zkan?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org References: <20260912-rufs-private-v1-1-716db733e655@samsung.com> <2026091124-treason-trickily-bc52@gregkh> <87mrtmvioe.fsf@kernel.org> <6JMwZ4EuSfQ8V4TGaPwatQ31m30TceLJblORsuILQmy4VV8Fx2lHbihL8ARsRUuJmaSUqek8L54y4Nk6DuZMXQ==@protonmail.internalid> <87eceyvdnv.fsf@kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <87eceyvdnv.fsf@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/12/26 5:48 AM, Andreas Hindborg wrote: > At any rate, the rationale for extracting the UFS driver is to make room > for features that fit poorly into the SCSI midlayer and which are not > standardized in T10 - without making additional work for scsi subsystem > maintainers. This rationale is completely wrong. I have seen multiple proposals for the introduction of new SCSI commands in JEDEC that made me think "Yikes. This proposal shouldn't be accepted." Some of these commands were attempts to introduce ZBC-like functionality for traditional block devices. That is wrong - if ZBC-like functionality is needed, ZBC should be implemented. Other proposals were about the introduction of new copy offload commands. Copy offload commands should be standardized by T10 instead of JEDEC. Bart.