Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.38 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.38;
Message-ID: <b9373252-710c-4a54-95cc-046314796960@quicinc.com>
Date:   Wed, 6 Dec 2023 19:32:54 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] ufs: core: Add CPU latency QoS support for ufs
 driver
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
        "Matthias Brugger" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>, <chu.stanley@gmail.com>
CC:     Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
        Avri Altman <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
        <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <quic_cang@quicinc.com>,
        <quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com>, Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@quicinc.com>
References: <20231204143101.64163-1-quic_mnaresh@quicinc.com>
 <20231204143101.64163-2-quic_mnaresh@quicinc.com>
 <590ade27-b4da-49be-933b-e9959aa0cd4c@acm.org>
 <692cd503-5b14-4be6-831d-d8e9c282a95e@quicinc.com>
 <5e7c5c75-cb5f-4afe-9d57-b0cab01a6f26@acm.org>
From:   Naresh Maramaina <quic_mnaresh@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <5e7c5c75-cb5f-4afe-9d57-b0cab01a6f26@acm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 12/5/2023 10:41 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 12/4/23 21:58, Naresh Maramaina wrote:
>> On 12/5/2023 12:30 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> On 12/4/23 06:30, Maramaina Naresh wrote:
>>>> +    /* This capability allows the host controller driver to use the 
>>>> PM QoS
>>>> +     * feature.
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    UFSHCD_CAP_PM_QOS                = 1 << 13,
>>>>   };
>>>
>>> Why does it depend on the host driver whether or not PM QoS is
>>> enabled? Why isn't it enabled unconditionally?
>>
>> For some platform vendors power KPI might be more important than 
>> random io KPI. Hence this flag is disabled by default and can be 
>> enabled based on platform requirement.
> 
> How about leaving this flag out unless if a host vendor asks explicitly
> for this flag?

IMHO, instead of completely removing this flag, how about having
flag like "UFSHCD_CAP_DISABLE_PM_QOS" which will make PMQOS enable
by default and if some host vendor wants to disable it explicitly,
they can enable that flag.
Please let me know your opinion.

>>>
>>>> + * @pm_qos_req: PM QoS request handle
>>>> + * @pm_qos_init: flag to check if pm qos init completed
>>>>    */
>>>
>>> Documentation for pm_qos_init is missing.
>>>
>> Sorry, i didn't get your comment, i have already added documentation 
>> for @pm_qos_init, @pm_qos_req variable as above. Do you want me to add 
>> this information some where else as well?
> 
> Oops, I meant 'qos_vote'.

Sure. I'll take of this in next patchset.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.
> 

Thanks,
Naresh