> On 4/1/22 02:32, Bean Huo wrote: > > Agree that the current UFS driver is messy, but I don't think there > > was such a big structural change before UFS 4.0 was released, > > especially the design of the UFS CQE driver. If you already have a > > plan for CQE, it's best to state it in the patch. If you have made > > such a big change in an environment that is now very stable, do we > > have to make changes after UFS 4.0? ? > > Hi Bean, > > Although this patch series will make it easier to add UFSHCI 4.0 support, I think > that UFSHCI 4.0 support can also be added without this patch series. Also, UFS4.0 and its UFSHCI4.0 companion are expected to be published around end of May, right? I doubt if we'll have platforms to test those changes within the V5.19, or even V5.20 timeframe. So MCQ should not conflict with those, mostly structural, cleanups. Thanks, Avri
