Re: [PATCH] UFS: Make TM command timeout configurable from host side

[Bart Van Assche]

On 11/11/25 6:58 PM, Peter Wang (王信友) wrote:
> Using a module parameter is a flexible method if the customer
> is using a device that may require an extended timeout value.

Introducing a new kernel module parameter for a timeout that depends on
the UFS device model doesn't sound ideal to me.

Can't we increase the default timeout (TM_CMD_TIMEOUT)? Increasing the 
default timeout shouldn't affect any configuration negatively, isn't it?

Thanks,

Bart.