On Thursday, May 09, 2013, James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2013-05-09 at 12:22 +0530, Santosh Y wrote: > > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thursday, May 09, 2013 Santosh wrote: > > >> > There are two patches remained. These are applied with your final comments. > > >> > Do you have any idea? > > >> > [PATCH v4 5/6] scsi: ufs: add dme configuration primitives > > >> > [PATCH v4 6/6] scsi: ufs: add dme control primitives > > >> > > > >> > > >> Since there is no use case for these implementations yet, except for > > >> ufshcd_get_dme_attr_val(), as per James's suggestion > > >> [http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg20207.html] > > >> I did not ACK the patches. > > >> The same patches can be used to implement related features and resubmit later. > > > I respect your decision. But I have another opinion. > > > The remained patches are basic operations which should be supported by ufshcd. > > > Especially, dme_set/set will be used in vender specific part of host controller rather than in > ufshcd itself. > > > And above all, Maya Erez completed to test and reported working fine. > > > If these patches are merged this time, it would be helpful to various hosts. > > > > > > > I'm ok with merging these patches if James is fine with it. I will ACK > > the patches. > > Well, no, not really. The rule is simple: we don't add new functions to > the kernel without callers. The reason is also simple: trying to do > interface first and then user some time later is a "make work" > development strategy that practically guarantees the interface is either > never used or needs modification. From the kernel's point of view, > which is more important, review of a function with no callers is only > partial because you've no idea how it will be used. Whereas if you > review a function and its callers, you can see how the API works and > possibly suggest improvements. Thank you for your feedback. Okay, it will be reintroduced with actual usage soon. Could you pick the remains except [5/6, 6/6] into your tree? The following patches include Santosh's ack. [PATCH v4 1/6] scsi: ufs: wrap the i/o access operations [PATCH v4 2/6] scsi: ufs: amend interrupt configuration [PATCH v4 3/6] scsi: ufs: fix interrupt status clears [PATCH v4 4/6] scsi: ufs: rework link start-up process Thanks, Seungwon Jeon > > James > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
