Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-97511-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Message-ID: <e96bd7b0b5b6abbde6a5e2396bc5a291e4c9ddad.camel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] scsi: ufs: Re-use exec_dev_cmd
From: Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com>
To: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@wdc.com>, "James E . J . Bottomley"
 <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, "Martin K . Petersen"
 <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>, Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>, 
	"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org"
	 <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org"
	 <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2024 20:29:47 +0100
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR04MB6575A5D43DF0589B480A4EA9FC202@DM6PR04MB6575.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20240305210051.10847-1-avri.altman@wdc.com>
	 <20240305210051.10847-3-avri.altman@wdc.com>
	 <6c75ce4cc05c6983137e954043d5ae7323a96172.camel@gmail.com>
	 <DM6PR04MB6575A5D43DF0589B480A4EA9FC202@DM6PR04MB6575.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.4-0ubuntu2 
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Thu, 2024-03-07 at 19:28 +0000, Avri Altman wrote:
> > On Tue, 2024-03-05 at 23:00 +0200, Avri Altman wrote:
> > > Move out the actual command issue from exec_dev_cmd so it can be
> > > used
> > > elsewhere.=C2=A0 While at it, remove a redundant "lrbp->cmd =3D NULL"
> > > assignment.=C2=A0 Also, as a free bonus, call the upiu trace if it
> > > doesn't.
> >=20
> >=20
> > This statement is a bit strange, what it is "if it doesn't"?
> >=20
> > from the change, the patch refactors command issue for broader
> > usage
> > and enhance UPIU tracing, isolate the command issuance logic from
> > `ufshcd_exec_dev_cmd` to allow reuse across different contexts.
> What I meant is, that I see no downside for including the bsg path in
> the upiu trace event.
> Do you object to that?

Avri,=20

no, I meant your commit message is not clearer. and then understood
after reading your patch.

Kind regards,
Bean