Re: [PATCH v4 01/10] scsi: ufs: Rename flags pm_op_in_progress and is_sys_suspended

[Can Guo]

Typo fixed.

On 2021-06-24 10:02, Can Guo wrote:
> Hi Bart,
>
> On 2021-06-24 04:57, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On 6/23/21 1:05 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > On 6/23/21 12:35 AM, Can Guo wrote:
> > > > Rename pm_op_in_progress and is_sys_suspended to 
> > > > wlu_pm_op_in_progress and
> > > > is_wlu_sys_suspended accordingly.
> > >
> > > My understanding is that power management operations must be 
> > > submitted
> > > to one particular UFS WLUN (hba->sdev_ufs_device). That makes the 
> > > "wlu_"
> > > part of the new names redundant. In other words, I like the current
> > > names better than the new names. Unless if I missed something, 
> > > consider
> > > dropping this patch.
> >
> > Hi Can,
> >
> > Reviewing later patches in this series made me realize that there are
> > two families of suspend/resume functions. One family of functions
> > operates at the platform level while the other family operates at the
> > SCSI LUN level. My comments about the suspend/resume functions are as
> > follows:
> > - It seems redundant to me to have system suspend support at the SCSI
> >   LUN level (__ufshcd_wl_suspend(hba, UFS_SYSTEM_PM)) and also at the
> >   platform level. Since the platform device is a parent of the SCSI
> >   WLUN, can system suspend/resume support be left out from
> >   ufshcd_wl_pm_ops (or in other words, remove the .freeze and .thaw
> >   callbacks)? Do we really need two calls from the power management
> >   subsystem into the UFS driver for every system suspend and every
> >   system resume?
>
> Asutosh and Adrian should be the right persons to answer this, since
> they've been working together on that huge change for 4 months -
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1417696/
>
> In short, we need a dedicated suspend/resume ops for the UFS device
> W-LU because one cannot send requests (not even PM requests) after the
> device is runtime suspended - sending SSU cmds in hba suspend/resume
> cannot pass through blk_queue_enter() as SSU cmd is sent to the UFS
> device W-LU scsi device (by now it is runtime suspended) but not the
> hba device.
>
> Of course we can keep the old way and send the SSU cmd through a
> request queue without block layer PM initialized (hba->cmd_queue for
> example, by pointing cmd_queue->queuedata to the UFS device W-LU scsi
> device), but that would look like a hack.
>
> > - Because of the device links (device_link_add()), the ufschd_wl_*()
> >   RPM callbacks are invoked after all LUNs have been suspended. I 
> > would
> >   appreciate it if the "ufshcd_wl_" prefix would be changed into
> >   "ufshcd_lun_" since that would make it more clear that these 
> > callbacks
> >   are associated with all LUNs and not only with the WLUN through 
> > which
> >   power management commands are submitted.
>
> Sure, we will do that later.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Can Guo.
>
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Bart.