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: <f277507b-b62e-c874-b2ad-276ea03d2263@acm.org>
Date:   Mon, 13 Sep 2021 20:23:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.0.3
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] scsi: ufs: introduce vendor isr
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@gmail.com>
Cc:     Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@samsung.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        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>,
        "Bean Huo (beanhuo)" <beanhuo@micron.com>,
        Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>, sc.suh@samsung.com,
        hy50.seo@samsung.com, sh425.lee@samsung.com,
        bhoon95.kim@samsung.com
References: <CGME20210913081148epcas2p21c23ca6a745f40083ee7d6e7da4d7c00@epcas2p2.samsung.com>
 <cover.1631519695.git.kwmad.kim@samsung.com>
 <fbdd02bc-01ab-c5b3-9355-3ebe04601b04@acm.org>
 <CAGOxZ51X-ThsqV35PiTh-awRvAkQ=Fjf9m+KRd1HLZ+pDNi=Xg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAGOxZ51X-ThsqV35PiTh-awRvAkQ=Fjf9m+KRd1HLZ+pDNi=Xg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/13/21 10:26, Alim Akhtar wrote:
> Thanks for your input. Completely agree with you, in fact your
> suggestions make sense to me. As a driver developer, surely we can
> take these concerns to the IP designers and see how far we can get in
> terms of standardization. That, however, is not something that can be
> accomplished overnight. My main concern is, what about millions of
> devices which are already in the market? UFS subsystem does support
> _vops_ to handle vendor specific hooks/modifications. I am not saying
> we should always follow this path, but surely until these deviations 
> are either fixed or become part of UFS standard itself, IMO.
Hi Alim,

If there are already millions of devices in the market that support this 
feature then that's an argument to proceed with this patch series.

Thanks,

Bart.