On 6/7/24 04:06, Ziqi Chen wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
index 21429ee..1afa862 100644
--- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
+++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
@@ -1392,7 +1392,7 @@ static int ufshcd_clock_scaling_prepare(struct ufs_hba *hba, u64 timeout_us)
* make sure that there are no outstanding requests when
* clock scaling is in progress
*/
- ufshcd_scsi_block_requests(hba);
+ blk_mq_quiesce_tagset(&hba->host->tag_set);
mutex_lock(&hba->wb_mutex);
down_write(&hba->clk_scaling_lock);
@@ -1401,7 +1401,7 @@ static int ufshcd_clock_scaling_prepare(struct ufs_hba *hba, u64 timeout_us)
ret = -EBUSY;
up_write(&hba->clk_scaling_lock);
mutex_unlock(&hba->wb_mutex);
- ufshcd_scsi_unblock_requests(hba);
+ blk_mq_unquiesce_tagset(&hba->host->tag_set);
goto out;
}
@@ -1422,7 +1422,7 @@ static void ufshcd_clock_scaling_unprepare(struct ufs_hba *hba, int err, bool sc
mutex_unlock(&hba->wb_mutex);
- ufshcd_scsi_unblock_requests(hba);
+ blk_mq_unquiesce_tagset(&hba->host->tag_set);
ufshcd_release(hba);
}
Why to replace only those ufshcd_scsi_block_requests() /
ufshcd_scsi_unblock_requests() calls? I don't think that it is ever safe to
use these functions instead of blk_mq_quiesce_tagset() /
blk_mq_unquiesce_tagset(). Please replace all ufshcd_scsi_block_requests() /
ufshcd_scsi_unblock_requests() calls and remove the
ufshcd_scsi_*block_requests() functions.
Thanks,
Bart.
