On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 12:35 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> you have verified the sender or the content.
>
> On 10/18/24 10:25 AM, Avri Altman wrote:
> > No. But the Fixes tag seems strange, isn't it?
>
> How about replacing the entire patch with the patch below?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
>
> scsi: ufs: core: Simplify ufshcd_exception_event_handler()
>
> The ufshcd_scsi_block_requests() and ufshcd_scsi_unblock_requests()
> calls were introduced in ufshcd_exception_event_handler() to prevent
> that querying the exception event information would time out. Commit
> 10fe5888a40e ("scsi: ufs: increase the scsi query response timeout")
> increased the timeout for querying exception information from 30 ms
> to
> 1.5 s and thereby eliminated the risk that a timeout would happen.
> Hence, the calls to block and unblock SCSI requests are superfluous.
> Remove these calls.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> index 76884df580c3..2fde1b0a6086 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> @@ -6195,12 +6195,11 @@ static void
> ufshcd_exception_event_handler(struct work_struct *work)
> u32 status = 0;
> hba = container_of(work, struct ufs_hba, eeh_work);
>
> -ufshcd_scsi_block_requests(hba);
> err = ufshcd_get_ee_status(hba, &status);
> if (err) {
> dev_err(hba->dev, "%s: failed to get exception status %d\n",
> __func__, err);
> -goto out;
> +return;
> }
>
> trace_ufshcd_exception_event(dev_name(hba->dev), status);
> @@ -6212,8 +6211,6 @@ static void
> ufshcd_exception_event_handler(struct
> work_struct *work)
> ufshcd_temp_exception_event_handler(hba, status);
>
> ufs_debugfs_exception_event(hba, status);
> -out:
> -ufshcd_scsi_unblock_requests(hba);
> }
>
> /* Complete requests that have door-bell cleared */
>
Hi Bart,
This patch looks good to me as well.
Thanks
Peter
