Re: [PATCH 2/3] scsi: ufs: Add temperature notification exception handling

["Asutosh Das (asd)" <asutoshd@codeaurora.org>]

On 9/1/2021 9:39 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 9/1/21 5:37 AM, Avri Altman wrote:
>> It is essentially up to the platform to decide what further actions need
>> to be taken. So add a designated vop for that.  Each chipset vendor can
>> decide if it wants to use the thermal subsystem, hw monitor, or some
>> Privet implementation.
> 
> Why to make chipset vendors define what to do in case of extreme 
> temperatures? I'd prefer a single implementation in ufshcd.c instead of 
> making each vendor come up with a different implementation.
> 
I think it should be either i.e. if a vendor specific implementation is 
defined use that else use the generic implementation in ufshcd.
There may be a bunch of things that each vendor may need/want do 
depending upon use-case, I imagine.

>> +    void    (*temp_notify)(struct ufs_hba *hba, u16 status);
> 
> Please do not add new vops without adding at least one implementation of 
> that vop.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.


-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
Linux Foundation Collaborative Project