On 2020-08-21 10:16, Lee Jones wrote:
Fixes the following W=1 kernel build warning(s):
drivers/net/wireless/ath/wil6210/wmi.c:52: warning: Incorrect use of
kernel-doc format: * Addressing - theory of operations
drivers/net/wireless/ath/wil6210/wmi.c:70: warning: Incorrect use of
kernel-doc fo
On 2020-08-19 10:23, Lee Jones wrote:
Kerneldoc expects attributes/parameters to be in '@*.: ' format and
gets confused if the variable does not follow the type/attribute
definitions.
Fixes the following W=1 kernel build warning(s):
drivers/net/wireless/ath/wil6210/debugfs.c:456: warning: Func
On 2019-08-27 17:44, Markus Elfring wrote:
From: Markus Elfring
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:39:02 +0200
A null pointer would be passed to a call of the function “kfree”
directly after a call of the function “kcalloc” failed at one place.
Remove this superfluous function call.
This issue was dete
On 2019-07-02 17:40, Colin King wrote:
From: Colin Ian King
There are several occasions where a negative cid value is passed
into wil_cid_valid and this is converted into a u8 causing the
range check of cid >= 0 to always succeed. Fix this by making
the cid argument an int to handle any -ve er
On 2018-12-05 09:59, YueHaibing wrote:
Fixes gcc '-Wunused-but-set-variable' warning:
drivers/net/wireless/ath/wil6210/main.c: In function
'_wil6210_disconnect':
drivers/net/wireless/ath/wil6210/main.c:407:23: warning:
variable 'wdev' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
It never use
On 2018-03-28 20:40, Colin King wrote:
From: Colin Ian King
The pointer ndev is being dereferenced before it is being null checked,
hence there is a potential null pointer deference. Fix this by only
dereferencing ndev after it has been null checked
Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1467010 ("Dere
On 2018-01-30 21:27, Colin King wrote:
From: Colin Ian King
Trivial fix to spelling mistake in debug error message text.
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/wil6210/main.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/wil6
Hi Nikita,
The patch got stuck for a while as there was a request to use the runtime
PM framework for implementing the idle time BKOPs and I didn't have the
ability to test it back then.
We plan to re-implement and test in the upcoming few months (aim to July).
Do you have a need for this feature
Hi Chris,
Can you please approve this patch and the corresponding mmc-utils patch?
Thanks,
Maya
> Maya,
>
> This looks good to me.
>
> Thanks,
>Luca
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-
>> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of me...@codeau
Hi,
Ulf / Luca - I would appreciate if you could review this new version with
high priority.
If you don't have additional concerns I would like to try and push the
changes to kernel-3.10.
Thanks,
Maya
> The sanitize support is added as a user-app ioctl call, and
> was removed from the block-devic
Hi Chris,
Can we push this change to kernel-3.10?
Thanks,
Maya
> The write packing statistics are used for debug purposes, in order
> to get the amount of packing in different scenarios.
> The statistics also include the reason for stopping the creation of
> the packed request.
>
> Signed-off-by:
Hi Ulf,
You are right, the caps2 flag for Sanitize can be removed.
I will send a fix for that.
Thanks,
Maya
> On 17 April 2013 13:38, Maya Erez wrote:
>> The sanitize support is added as a user-app ioctl call, and
>> was removed from the block-device request, since its purpose is
>> to be invoke
Hi Luca,
See below (2 comments).
Thanks,
Maya
> Hi Maya,
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-
>> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Maya Erez
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:39 PM
>> To: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: linux-arm-...@vg
Hi Chris and Luca,
Sorry for the late response.
Yaniv is on vacation for the last month and will be back at the end of the
week.
We will add the HPI in case Sanitize times-out.
Thanks,
Maya
> Hi Yaniv, Maya,
>
> On Mon, Mar 11 2013, Luca Porzio (lporzio) wrote:
>> In case of Sanitize timeout, th
Hi Luca,
Having a timeout that takes into consideration the card size would be
artificial as we cannot have the ability to create a function for its
calculation that will fit all the card vendors.
I suggest keeping it as a constant value for simplicity, as 4 minutes
cover all the card sizes.
Tha
Thanks, Ulf. Your help is appreciated.
> On 10 January 2013 10:22, wrote:
>> Hi Ulf,
>>
>> See below.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Maya
>>> Hi Maya,
>>>
>>> On 24 December 2012 14:51, Maya Erez wrote:
Devices have various maintenance operations need to perform
internally.
In order to reduce
Hi Ulf,
See below.
Thanks,
Maya
> Hi Maya,
>
> On 24 December 2012 14:51, Maya Erez wrote:
>> Devices have various maintenance operations need to perform internally.
>> In order to reduce latencies during time critical operations like read
>> and write, it is better to execute maintenance operat
Hi Ulf,
Sorry for the late response.
See my reply below.
Thanks,
Maya
On Thu, December 6, 2012 2:18 am, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> Hi Maya,
>
> On 4 December 2012 22:17, wrote:
>> Hi Ulf,
>>
>> Let me try to better explain:
>> The idea behind the periodic BKOPS is to check the card's need for BKOPS
Hi Ulf,
Let me try to better explain:
The idea behind the periodic BKOPS is to check the card's need for BKOPS
periodically in order to prevent an urgent BKOPS need by the card.
In order to actually manage to prevent the urgent BKOPS need, the host
should give the card enough time to perform the B
Hi Jaehoon,
With this patch we don't expect to see any degradation. Thanks for
verifying that.
The test plan would be to run the lmdd and iozone benchmarks with this
patch and verify that the performance is not degraded.
I verified it with the msm_sdcc controller.
Chris - We do expect it to influ
Hi Chris,
I managed to find a solution in which there is no need to check the number
of written / discarded sectors as a trigger for BKOPS status check.
I moved the code that checks the need to stop the BKOPS to mmc/block code,
in which there is no need for additional claim_host and remove_host
op
Hi Jaehoon,
Any update on this patch review and testing?
Thanks,
Maya
On Mon, October 15, 2012 11:53 pm, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> Hi Maya,
>
> I'm testing with your patch..but i need to have the more time for testing.
> In now, it looks good to me. Thank you for working the idle bkops.
>
> Best Reg
Hi Chris and all,
According to the eMMC4.5 standard, a host that enables the BKOPS_EN bit
must also check the BKOPS status periodically:
"Host shall check the status periodically and start background operations
as needed, so that the device has enough time for its maintenance
operations, to help r
Hi Venkat,
Sorry for the late response. I came back from a long vacation and had many
issues to take care of.
If you still need a rebased version of the packed commands patches, I can
send a rebased version of the write packing control patch once Seungwon
Jeon will send the rebased version of the
On Thu, August 30, 2012 12:36 am, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> On 08/05/2012 10:08 PM, Maya Erez wrote:
>> When the mmcqd thread is idle, a delayed work is created to check the
>> need for BKOPs. The time to start the delayed work is calculated based
>> on the host controller suspend timeout, in case it
Hi Jens,
Can you refer to my reply?
Currently the test-iosched is our only option for testing the eMMC4.5
features on a HS200 eMMC card.
Thanks,
Maya
On Thu, August 2, 2012 6:16 am, me...@codeaurora.org wrote:
>
> On Tue, July 31, 2012 8:46 am, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 07/31/2012 04:36 PM, me...@c
On Fri, July 27, 2012 2:07 am, S, Venkatraman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 12:24 AM, wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, July 26, 2012 8:28 am, S, Venkatraman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, wrote:
On Mon, July 23, 2012 5:22 am, S, Venkatraman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM
On Tue, July 31, 2012 8:46 am, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 07/31/2012 04:36 PM, me...@codeaurora.org wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> Do you have comments on this patch?
>> Can we push it to kernel 3.6 version?
>
> I have questions - what is this good for? In other words, explain to me
> why this is useful cod
Hi Jens,
Do you have comments on this patch?
Can we push it to kernel 3.6 version?
Thanks,
Maya
On Tue, July 31, 2012 7:25 am, Maya Erez wrote:
> The test scheduler allows testing a block device by dispatching
> specific requests according to the test case and declare PASS/FAIL
> according to the
On Thu, July 26, 2012 8:28 am, S, Venkatraman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, wrote:
>> On Mon, July 23, 2012 5:22 am, S, Venkatraman wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM, wrote:
On Wed, July 18, 2012 12:26 am, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi, [removing Jens and the documentat
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Maya Erez
On Wed, July 25, 2012 4:31 am, Yaniv Gardi wrote:
> This feature delete the unmap memory region of the eMMC card,
> by writing to a specific register in the EXT_CSD
> unmap region is the memory region that were previously deleted
> (by erase, trim or disca
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Maya Erez
On Wed, July 25, 2012 4:31 am, Yaniv Gardi wrote:
> Adding a new ioctl to support sanitize operation in eMMC
> cards version 4.5.
> The sanitize ioctl support helps performing this operation
> via user application.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yaniv Gardi
>
> ---
>
On Wed, July 25, 2012 2:32 am, Yaniv Gardi wrote:
> @@ -238,6 +238,7 @@ struct mmc_host {
> #define MMC_CAP2_BROKEN_VOLTAGE (1 << 7)/* Use the broken
> voltage */
> #define MMC_CAP2_DETECT_ON_ERR (1 << 8)/* On I/O err check
> card removal
> */
> #define MMC_CAP2_HC_
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Maya Erez
On Wed, July 25, 2012 2:32 am, Yaniv Gardi wrote:
> Adding a new ioctl to support sanitize operation in eMMC
> cards version 4.5.
> The sanitize ioctl support helps performing this operation
> via user application.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yaniv Gardi
>
> ---
>
Attached are the trace logs for parallel read and write lmdd operations.
On Tue, July 24, 2012 1:44 am, me...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On Mon, July 23, 2012 5:22 am, S, Venkatraman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM, wrote:
>>> On Wed, July 18, 2012 12:26 am, Chris Ball wrote:
Hi, [r
On Mon, July 23, 2012 5:22 am, S, Venkatraman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:13 PM, wrote:
>> On Wed, July 18, 2012 12:26 am, Chris Ball wrote:
>>> Hi, [removing Jens and the documentation list, since now we're
talking about the MMC side only]
>>> On Wed, Jul 18 2012, me...@codeaurora.org wr
On Wed, July 18, 2012 12:26 am, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi, [removing Jens and the documentation list, since now we're
> talking about the MMC side only]
>
> On Wed, Jul 18 2012, me...@codeaurora.org wrote:
>> Is there anything else that holds this patch from being pushed to
mmc-next?
>
> Yes, I'm sti
On Wed, July 18, 2012 11:46 pm, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi Yaniv,
>
> On Thu, Jun 28 2012, Yaniv Gardi wrote:
>> This feature delete the unmap memory region of the eMMC card,
>> by writing to a specific register in the EXT_CSD
>> unmap region is the memory region that were previously deleted
>> (by era
Hi Chris,
Is there anything else that holds this patch from being pushed to mmc-next?
Thanks,
Maya
On Tue, July 17, 2012 3:50 pm, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi Muthu,
>
> On Mon, Jul 16 2012, Muthu Kumar wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Chris Ball wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 15 2012, M
Hi all,
Do you have additional comments on this patch?
I rebased it to the latest linux-next since the write packed command patch
was merged in.
Thanks,
Maya
On Sat, July 14, 2012 11:46 am, Maya Erez wrote:
> The write packing control will ensure that read requests latency is
> not increased due
Hi all,
Do you have additional comments on this patch?
Thanks,
Maya
On Sat, July 14, 2012 11:46 am, Maya Erez wrote:
> Separate MMC specific attributes from general block device
> attributes and move them from the /sys/block/ directory
> to /sys/block//mmc directory
>
> Signed-off-by: Maya Erez
Hi Chris,
Can we push this change to mmc-next?
Thanks,
Maya
On Mon, July 2, 2012 5:15 am, Maya Erez wrote:
> The write packing control will ensure that read requests latency is
> not increased due to long write packed commands.
>
> The trigger for enabling the write packing is managing to pack se
Hi Chris,
Can we push this change to mmc-next?
Thanks,
Maya
On Mon, July 2, 2012 5:15 am, Maya Erez wrote:
> Separate MMC specific attributes from general block device
> attributes and move them from the /sys/block/ directory
> to /sys/block//mmc directory
>
> Signed-off-by: Maya Erez
>
> diff -
43 matches
Mail list logo
