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;
Message-ID: <4e84df2ecb17dfb1fc8070953d8690b29615f409.camel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] scsi: ufs: Refector ufshcd_setup_clocks() to
 remove skip_ref_clk
From:   Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com>
To:     Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
Cc:     asutoshd@codeaurora.org, nguyenb@codeaurora.org,
        hongwus@codeaurora.org, ziqichen@codeaurora.org,
        rnayak@codeaurora.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@android.com, saravanak@google.com, salyzyn@google.com,
        Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
        Avri Altman <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@intel.com>,
        Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>,
        Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
        Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:02:52 +0100
In-Reply-To: <9484cba7b95c6c6fcbafd96bc35c1dee@codeaurora.org>
References: <1606202906-14485-1-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org>
         <1606202906-14485-2-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org>
         <9070660d115dd96c70bc3cc90d5c7dab833f36a8.camel@gmail.com>
         <d112935400a5ef115a384a4c753b6d04@codeaurora.org>
         <0b0c545d80f9a0e8106a634063c23a8f0ba895fc.camel@gmail.com>
         <9484cba7b95c6c6fcbafd96bc35c1dee@codeaurora.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 2020-11-25 at 20:28 +0800, Can Guo wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-11-25 at 08:53 +0800, Can Guo wrote:
> > > > > +       bool always_on_while_link_active;
> > > > 
> > > > Can,
> > > > using a sentence as a parameter name looks a little bit clumsy
> > > > to
> > > > me.
> > > > The meaning has been explained in the comments section. How
> > > > about
> > > > simplify it and in line with other parameters in the structure?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Do you have a better name in mind?
> > > 
> > 
> > no specail input in mind, maybe just "bool eternal_on"
> 
> It is like plain "always_on", but it cannot tell the whole story.
> If it is not something crutial, let's just let it go first so long
> as it does not break the original functionality. What do you say?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Can Guo.

Can, 

yes, it is not functional change, but always_on_while_link_active is
too fat, and not non-productive way.
anyway, 

Reviewed-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>