Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
Message-ID: <286b6f8a-c634-19ed-cf53-276cfe05d03f@quicinc.com>
Date:   Thu, 7 Dec 2023 15:56:43 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.3.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] ufs: core: Add CPU latency QoS support for ufs
 driver
To:     Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
CC:     Naresh Maramaina <quic_mnaresh@quicinc.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>,
        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>,
        "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>
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>
 <b9373252-710c-4a54-95cc-046314796960@quicinc.com>
 <20231206153242.GI12802@thinkpad>
 <effb603e-ca7a-4f24-9783-4d62790165ae@acm.org>
 <20231207094357.GI2932@thinkpad>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <20231207094357.GI2932@thinkpad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 12/7/2023 3:13 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 03:02:04PM -1000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 12/6/23 05:32, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 07:32:54PM +0530, Naresh Maramaina wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>
>> That would result in a flag that is tested but that is never set by
>> upstream code. I'm not sure that's acceptable.
>>
> 
> Agree. The flag shouldn't be introduced if there are no users.
> 
>>> If a vendor wants to disable this feature, then the driver has to be modified.
>>> That won't be very convenient. So either this has to be configured through sysfs
>>> or Kconfig if flexibility matters.
>>
>> Kconfig sounds worse to me because changing any Kconfig flag requires a
>> modification of the Android GKI kernel.
>>
> 
> Hmm, ok. Then I think we can have a sysfs hook to toggle the enable switch.

Hi Bart, Mani

How about keeping this feature enabled by default and having a module 
parameter to disable pmqos feature if required ?

Regards,
Nitin

> 
> - Mani
> 
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Bart.
>