Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] scsi: ufs: Add UFS-feature layer
Reply-To: daejun7.park@samsung.com
From:   Daejun Park <daejun7.park@samsung.com>
To:     Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com>,
        Daejun Park <daejun7.park@samsung.com>,
        ALIM AKHTAR <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
        "avri.altman@wdc.com" <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
        "jejb@linux.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        "martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        "asutoshd@codeaurora.org" <asutoshd@codeaurora.org>,
        "beanhuo@micron.com" <beanhuo@micron.com>,
        "stanley.chu@mediatek.com" <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>,
        "cang@codeaurora.org" <cang@codeaurora.org>,
        "bvanassche@acm.org" <bvanassche@acm.org>,
        "tomas.winkler@intel.com" <tomas.winkler@intel.com>
CC:     "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Sang-yoon Oh <sangyoon.oh@samsung.com>,
        Sung-Jun Park <sungjun07.park@samsung.com>,
        yongmyung lee <ymhungry.lee@samsung.com>,
        Jinyoung CHOI <j-young.choi@samsung.com>,
        Adel Choi <adel.choi@samsung.com>,
        BoRam Shin <boram.shin@samsung.com>
In-Reply-To: <47dcc56312229fc8f25f39c2beeb3a8ba811f3e9.camel@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1210830415.21592275802431.JavaMail.epsvc@epcpadp1>
Date:   Tue, 16 Jun 2020 10:18:42 +0900
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
References: <47dcc56312229fc8f25f39c2beeb3a8ba811f3e9.camel@gmail.com>
        <336371513.41592205783606.JavaMail.epsvc@epcpadp2>
        <231786897.01592205482200.JavaMail.epsvc@epcpadp2>
        <231786897.01592212081335.JavaMail.epsvc@epcpadp2>
        <CGME20200615062708epcms2p19a7fbc051bcd5e843c29dcd58fff4210@epcms2p6>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi, Bean
> 
> On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 16:23 +0900, Daejun Park wrote:
> > +void ufsf_scan_features(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> > +{
> > +       int ret;
> > +
> > +       init_waitqueue_head(&hba->ufsf.sdev_wait);
> > +       atomic_set(&hba->ufsf.slave_conf_cnt, 0);
> > +
> > +       if (hba->dev_info.wspecversion >= HPB_SUPPORTED_VERSION &&
> > +           (hba->dev_info.b_ufs_feature_sup & UFS_DEV_HPB_SUPPORT)) 
> 
> How about removing this check "(hba->dev_info.wspecversion >=
> HPB_SUPPORTED_VERSION" since ufs with lower version than v3.1 can add
> HPB feature by FFU, 
> if (hba->dev_info.b_ufs_feature_sup  &UFS_FEATURE_SUPPORT_HPB_BIT) is
> enough.
OK, changing it seems no problem. But I want to know what other people think
about this version checking code.

Thanks,
Daejun