Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Message-ID: <e408ce14d322223c1412efa46e8e4d30f44fa98c.camel@iokpp.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] scsi: ufs: core: Add UFS RTC support
From:   Bean Huo <beanhuo@iokpp.de>
To:     Thomas =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Wei=DFschuh?= <thomas@t-8ch.de>
Cc:     avri.altman@wdc.com, bvanassche@acm.org, alim.akhtar@samsung.com,
        jejb@linux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com,
        stanley.chu@mediatek.com, mani@kernel.org, quic_cang@quicinc.com,
        quic_asutoshd@quicinc.com, beanhuo@micron.com,
        linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        mikebi@micron.com, lporzio@micron.com
Date:   Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:27:37 +0100
In-Reply-To: <e2e77da5-c344-4913-a321-4cfdcc4a3915@t-8ch.de>
References: <20231109125217.185462-1-beanhuo@iokpp.de>
         <20231109125217.185462-2-beanhuo@iokpp.de>
         <e2e77da5-c344-4913-a321-4cfdcc4a3915@t-8ch.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.4-0ubuntu2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

Hi Thomas,

Thank you for your review. I will resolve the highlighted issue in the
upcoming version.=C2=A0Two separate questions that require individual
answers as below:=20


On Thu, 2023-11-09 at 15:05 +0100, Thomas Wei=C3=9Fschuh wrote:
> > =C2=A0 static int ufs_get_device_desc(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> > =C2=A0 {
> > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0int err;
> > @@ -8237,6 +8321,8 @@ static int ufs_get_device_desc(struct ufs_hba
> > *hba)
> > =C2=A0=20
> > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0ufshcd_temp_notif_probe=
(hba, desc_buf);
> > =C2=A0=20
> > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0ufs_init_rtc(hba, desc_buf);
> > +
>=20
> As somebody with no idea and no access to the specs:
>=20
> Is this available for all devices and all protocol versions?
>=20
> >=20
I would like to mention that while I cannot confirm that RTC works on
all protocol versions, it has been consistently functional on all
devices in the market since the introduction of UFS 2.0, which also
introduced RTC. I am not aware of any UFS version lower than 2.0
currently available on the market. In the event that a vendor has a
product with a lower UFS version, we can consider implementing a
version check.

> >=20
> >=20

> >=20
>=20
> > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0goto out;
> > =C2=A0=20
> > =C2=A0 set_link_active:
> > @@ -9840,6 +9930,8 @@ static int __ufshcd_wl_resume(struct ufs_hba
> > *hba, enum ufs_pm_op pm_op)
> > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0if (ret)
> > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
goto set_old_link_state;
> > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0ufshcd_set_timestamp_attr(hba);
> > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0schedule_delayed_work(&hba->ufs_rtc_delayed_work,
> > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0msecs_to_ji
> > ffies(UFS_RTC_UPDATE_EVERY_MS));
> > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0}
> > =C2=A0=20
> > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0if (ufshcd_keep_autobko=
ps_enabled_except_suspend(hba))
> > diff --git a/include/ufs/ufs.h b/include/ufs/ufs.h
> > index e77ab1786856..18b39c6b3a97 100644
> > --- a/include/ufs/ufs.h
> > +++ b/include/ufs/ufs.h
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> > =C2=A0 #include <linux/bitops.h>
> > =C2=A0 #include <linux/types.h>
> > =C2=A0 #include <uapi/scsi/scsi_bsg_ufs.h>
> > +#include <linux/rtc.h>
>=20
> Seems unnecessary.

seems it's needed, otherwise, I will get:
./include/ufs/ufs.h:599:9: error: unknown type name =E2=80=98time64_t=E2=80=
=99


Kind regards,
Bean