From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569B4C3DA65 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 16:22:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1353640AbjHQQW2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:22:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40832 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1353612AbjHQQV4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:21:56 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45A4C358D; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 09:21:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1692289315; x=1723825315; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:references:from: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Bv6xL5qkb79fBPG084R3pJENvc5/Ahe+5p+9JBEEGBI=; b=LKHreA7M2M3niCYNMEJIqPdc6scOwJ3c2HYi/yRmxM/6rJ4FW+UKSS+2 voZmGsvAAaI8DCCaUPzQsFKwzziYfRv0/dWcEat5y2Hohen2g4kMJus4X 0uPvIgKnJRBou2uc3JSMCXK5FNw7ai/t3yWOqVa3OB3OWlNCkPb+XY6ZT jvMmjFwyDn+xn3FC6MoH9kobi96nKGMQRi0IRvqLU2EcP6jF3VP/+qVHO u59MRjh46u9pdceIIcxsY5d2AjmDEDbbrn4JuQxyZlK4k9tXScqBllC4p 7C7xfrnvrItr+pJ1MDuHonNzLBiUL04XHUw16zZTzEctDI9M/7BLKalsd w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10805"; a="370325515" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,180,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="370325515" Received: from fmsmga007.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.52]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Aug 2023 09:17:03 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10805"; a="737774313" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,180,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="737774313" Received: from ahunter6-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.0.2.15]) ([10.249.40.107]) by fmsmga007-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Aug 2023 09:16:59 -0700 Message-ID: <817a6dda-c227-8f90-97f3-204c7d03fb54@intel.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 19:16:53 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/102.0 Thunderbird/102.14.0 Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 2/2] ufs: poll HCS.UCRDY before issuing a UIC command Content-Language: en-US To: Bart Van Assche , Kiwoong Kim , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alim.akhtar@samsung.com, avri.altman@wdc.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com, beanhuo@micron.com, sc.suh@samsung.com, hy50.seo@samsung.com, sh425.lee@samsung.com, kwangwon.min@samsung.com, junwoo80.lee@samsung.com, wkon.kim@samsung.com References: <9c7ccbfb8fe05c29ab3e31d9cd14e6b91065b8b0.1690939662.git.kwmad.kim@samsung.com> From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 17/08/23 18:02, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 8/14/23 04:26, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> And perhaps the following is neater: >> >>     u32 val; >> >>     return !read_poll_timeout(ufshcd_readl, val, val & UIC_COMMAND_READY, >>                   500, UIC_CMD_TIMEOUT * 1000, false, hba, >>                   REG_CONTROLLER_STATUS); > > Would the above make readers of that code wonder whether read_poll_timeout() > perhaps returns a boolean? Wouldn't it be better to test the > read_poll_timeout() return value as follows? > >      return read_poll_timeout(ufshcd_readl, val, val & UIC_COMMAND_READY, >                    500, UIC_CMD_TIMEOUT * 1000, false, hba, >                    REG_CONTROLLER_STATUS) == 0; > Either is fine, otherwise: Reviewed-by: Adrian Hunter