From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 011.lax.mailroute.net (011.lax.mailroute.net [199.89.1.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 560D7401A0E for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2026 21:12:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773954776; cv=none; b=hQap8SfXKTyKxxE4ah84gc9mSoc26yfAqIyEWnbLn64LFoKvKT2q2trGHsLp/gnvjhSP31Gq2rWn8176b29HPDwC9FqUf8mY/ky0Yui4Mt7wahyh1H+cWB6lQOL9PJ/RjwoEOLZl+RN200tIAjNLiYNVgroZZzHIkvJBQzFP1Kk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773954776; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ljXeHe97eM0a8V94nB3BhrLOkpJlYhp1rEq3ypPP7gY=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Hc4bhHL1ybjsJvukmSPkXNxnrMU7Gpxb88PhU8pkZL7x2LwM9m8s90btH8yjhkD5duAEdpm6M87dc4vEjFDTmafk4uzZnUNdBqCP22Dozj+FZB7bsnjH3zXO3CsTqxAByHaFuWwoWRUAx9kdHG6OjD/s77JfVk8qT90cg0M+/E8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b=jjlUNbVb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b="jjlUNbVb" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 011.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4fcJLr3FXPz1XM31H; Thu, 19 Mar 2026 21:12:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=acm.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :from:from:content-language:references:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mr01; t=1773954766; x=1776546767; bh=wO3DvWZvK/H2qZKwomxZk5dE gJcsW85mBMdc3+zDQFA=; b=jjlUNbVboDDNOZlZ3Cr6BMic37nN9IKJI9+aJN4Y nSwshTx1w/Vc8JTEY7LXKyQNLp9S2Ba8WMHJpy+1EZ9+pNQeGmukg6fVDHAVDGEZ TAIVjR2k0t1TILUuZ4yFZKeANZd3R8Lyz50tR82CJfC5pSGi8UcMg7JYDqIUEoc9 pWpC5DZpGuQl9zZCXPpyqNqUA3a1WH71jiB8HQ7m/UwsqqRaTHf6JdN8+jOOAlRA 1ihmFBs8nCx2uKuVqAKYKhdv0sdmiciwc1uVrrvFhkGWkc8KlLLpjU5EPouO6FHq udCMouKhUUCuxpr6lpD433FNKmJ/IrfsOsFHPP2zGdLLng== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 011.lax.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (011.lax [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id bUdpUJGXnAX4; Thu, 19 Mar 2026 21:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [100.119.48.131] (unknown [104.135.180.219]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bvanassche@acm.org) by 011.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4fcJLg4GgTz1XM5kW; Thu, 19 Mar 2026 21:12:42 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <64cc22ec-4d43-45c0-b63f-0401776f79a7@acm.org> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 14:12:42 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: core: Add a vop to handle vendor specific ops To: Hongjie Fang , avri.altman@wdc.com, peter.wang@mediatek.com, beanhuo@micron.com, "Martin K . Petersen" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260319093839.1854051-1-hongjiefang@asrmicro.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <20260319093839.1854051-1-hongjiefang@asrmicro.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 3/19/26 2:38 AM, Hongjie Fang wrote: > add a vop to allow some vendors to do some additional ops > for some interrupts if necessary. UFS patches should be sent to Martin K. Petersen and should be Cc-ed to the linux-scsi mailing list. Additionally, a patch description should not only explain what has been changed but also why a change is being mode. "to do some additional ops for some interrupts if necessary" is too vague. > @@ -7141,6 +7141,8 @@ static irqreturn_t ufshcd_sl_intr(struct ufs_hba *hba, u32 intr_status) > { > irqreturn_t retval = IRQ_NONE; > > + ufshcd_vops_vendor_intr(hba); Why to call this code from inside ufshcd_sl_intr() instead of from the ufshcd_sl_intr() caller? > @@ -380,6 +381,7 @@ struct ufs_hba_variant_ops { > int (*config_esi)(struct ufs_hba *hba); > void (*config_scsi_dev)(struct scsi_device *sdev); > u32 (*freq_to_gear_speed)(struct ufs_hba *hba, unsigned long freq); > + void (*vendor_intr)(struct ufs_hba *hba); > }; Where is the implementation of .vendor_intr? I don't see any implementation of that new callback in this patch. Please always submit at least one implementation of a new vendor operation together with the patch that adds the new vendor operation. Thanks, Bart.