> On 4/15/19 5:23 AM, Stanley Chu wrote:
> > If UFS device responds an unknown request response code, we can not
> > know what it was via logs because the code is replaced by "DID_ERROR
> > << 16" before log printing.
> >
> > Fix this to provide precise request response code information for
> > ea
>
> The pointer value is initialized as &hba->vreg_info, and it's never changed.
> It's
> not necessary to check the pointer is null or not.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zeng Guangyue
Looks like you are correct.
Ack.
Thanks
Tomas
> ---
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 11 +--
> 1 file changed,
> > Hello Tomas,
> >
> > >
> > > Define new a type: uc_string_id for easier string handling and less
> > > casting. Reduce number or string copies in price of a dynamic
> > > allocation.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Tomas Winkler
> > Tested-by: Avri Altman
> >
> > Just one nit - doesn't really matt
>
> On 09/01/2019 16:38, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
>
> >> On 11/12/2018 15:18, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> >>
> >>> memcpy_fromio() doesn't provide any control over access size.
> >>> For example, on arm64, it is implemented using readb and readq.
> >>> This may trigger a synchronous external abort:
> >>>
>
> memcpy_fromio() doesn't provide any control over access size.
> For example, on arm64, it is implemented using readb and readq.
> This may trigger a synchronous external abort:
>
> [3.729943] Internal error: synchronous external abort: 96000210 [#1]
> PREEMPT SMP
> [3.737000] Modules l
> -Original Message-
> From: Avri Altman [mailto:avri.alt...@wdc.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 18:18
> To: Winkler, Tomas ; James E . J . Bottomley
> ; Martin K . Petersen
> ; Vinayak Holikatti ;
> Hunter, Adrian
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig ; Vivek Gau
>
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 07:27:38PM +, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > I value your opinion but I'm not responsible for inventing RPMB
> > and/or its implementation storage devices (eMMC, UFC, NVMe), it's pretty
> much done deal out there in the wild.
> >
>
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 09:53:12PM +0200, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > Register UFS RPMB LUN with the RPMB subsystem and provide
> > implementation for the RPMB access operations. RPMB partition is
> > accessed via a sequence of security protocol in and security protocol
> > out commands with UFS
>
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tomas Winkler
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Usyskin
> Tested-by: Avri Altman
>
> - mmc - full functionality. One issue found that was fixed on V6: patch V6
> 2/9.
> - ufs - read & read counter only. Testing is still wip.
>
>
> > +static int rpmb_request_verify(s
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:17:48PM +, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > \
> > > Subject: [PATCH v6 0/9] Replay Protected Memory Block (RPMB)
> > > subsystem
> > >
> > >
> > > Few storage technologies such is EMMC, UFS, and NVMe support RPM
\
> Subject: [PATCH v6 0/9] Replay Protected Memory Block (RPMB) subsystem
>
>
> Few storage technologies such is EMMC, UFS, and NVMe support RPMB
> hardware partition with common protocol and frame layout.
> The RPMB partition cannot be accessed via standard block layer, but by a set
> of specif
\
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/8] char: rpmb: provide a user space interface
>
> On Sun 2016-09-04 11:35:33, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 08:05:26PM +, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > &
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 08:05:26PM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 09:44:03AM +, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon 2016-07-18 23:27:49, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > &
>
> On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 09:44:03AM +, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon 2016-07-18 23:27:49, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > > > The user space API is achieved via two synchronous IOCTL.
> > >
> > > IOCTLs?
> >
> > Will
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:27:48PM +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > Add attribute type that displays underlay storage type technology
> > EMMC, UFS, and attribute id, that displays underlay storage device id.
> > For EMMC this would be content of CID and for UFS serial number from
> > the devic
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:27:50PM +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > This is a simple platform device used for testing the RPMB subsystem.
> >
> > The module currently supports two configuration options:
> > 1. max_wr_blks: for specifying max blocks that can be written in a
> > single command 2.
>
> On Mon 2016-07-18 23:27:49, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > The user space API is achieved via two synchronous IOCTL.
>
> IOCTLs?
Will fix
> > Simplified one, RPMB_IOC_REQ_CMD, were read result cycles is
> performed
> > by the framework on behalf the user and second, RPMB_IOC_SEQ_CMD
> where
> >
>
> Few storage technologies such is EMMC, UFS, and NVMe support RPMB
> hardware partition with common protocol and frame layout.
> The RPMB partition cannot be accessed via standard block layer, but by a set
> of specific commands: WRITE, READ, GET_WRITE_COUNTER, and
> PROGRAM_KEY.
> Such a part
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Tomas Winkler
> wrote:
> > The user space API is achieved via two synchronous IOCTL.
> > Simplified one, RPMB_IOC_REQ_CMD, were read result cycles is
> performed
> > by the framework on behalf the user and second, RPMB_IOC_SEQ_CMD
> where
> > the whole RPMB se
> 2;
>
> This looks like it does not support 8KB writes added in v5.1 spec. Can that
> be
> supported?
You are right there is not support for 8K packet, but the change should be
simple.
I will update the patch.
Thanks
Tomas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-
>>> wrote:
>>> > Few storage technology such is EMMC, UFS, and NVMe support RPMB
>>> >hardware partition with common protocol and frame layout.
>>> > The RPMB partition cannot be accessed via standard block layer, but
>>> >by a set of specific commands: WRITE, READ, GET_WRITE_COUNTER, and
>>> >PROG
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Tomas Winkler
> wrote:
> > Few storage technology such is EMMC, UFS, and NVMe support RPMB
> >hardware partition with common protocol and frame layout.
> > The RPMB partition cannot be accessed via standard block layer, but
> >by a set of specific commands: WRI
> -Original Message-
> From: Hannes Reinecke [mailto:h...@suse.de]
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 11:25
> To: Douglas Gilbert ; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: martin.peter...@oracle.com; Winkler, Tomas
> ; emi...@redhat.com;
> bart.vanass...@sandisk.com
> Subj
>
> Based on "[PATH V2] scsi_debug: rework resp_report_luns" patch sent by
> Tomas Winkler on Thursday, 26 Feb 2015. His notes:
> 1. Remove duplicated boundary checks which simplify the fill-in
> loop
> 2. Use more of scsi generic API
> Replace fixed length response array a with heap al
>
> On Sun 2016-04-03 12:42:46, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Tomas Winkler
> > ---
> > Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-rpmb | 15 +++
> > MAINTAINERS| 1 +
> > 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/AB
On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 20:16 +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi Tomas,
>
> [auto build test ERROR on char-misc/char-misc-testing]
> [also build test ERROR on v4.6-rc2 next-20160405]
> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a
> note to help improving the system]
>
> url:
>
> On 4/7/2016 10:15 PM, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 09:51 +0100, Joao Pinto wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> On 4/4/2016 12:11 PM, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> >>> Register UFS RPMB LUN with the RPMB subsystem and provide
> &
On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 09:51 +0100, Joao Pinto wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 4/4/2016 12:11 PM, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > Register UFS RPMB LUN with the RPMB subsystem and provide
> > implementation for the RPMB access operations. RPMB partition is
> > accessed via a sequence of security protocol in and secur
Hi,
On 4/5/2016 12:34 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>> "Joao" == Joao Pinto writes:
>
> Joao,
>
> Joao> The work consisted of: - Fixed typo in ufshcd-pltfrm.c - Tweak
> Joao> ufshcd.c for UFS 2.0 support - Implement ufshcd-dwc which
> Joao> contains all DWC HW specific code - Unipro attr
>
I saw some kbuild robot issues regarding the patchset, so I would suggest you
make a v2 of the patch set and I can run some tests with the DW UFS Host design.
Yes the second round is on the way but there are (for) quite minor issues.
Tomas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "u
On 04/03/2016 02:42 AM, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> Few storage technology such is EMMC, UFS, and NVMe support RPMB
> hardware partition with common protocol and frame layout.
> The RPMB partition cannot be accessed via standard block layer, but by
> a set of specific commands: WRITE, READ, GET_WRIT
On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 19:57 +0100, Joao Pinto wrote:
> Adding UFS 2.0 support to the UFS core driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joao Pinto
Looks good to me, though not tested yet
Tomas
> ---
> Changes v11->v12 (Tomas Winkler):
> - devicetree binding tweak was moved to a separated patch
> - unipro twea
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h index
2570d94..8b0cdf0 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h
@@ -262,6 +262,7 @@ struct ufs_pwr_mode_info {
* @suspend: called during host controller PM callback
* @resume: called during host c
Hi Thomas,
On 3/29/2016 11:41 AM, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
>
> Adding UFS 2.0 support to the UFS core driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joao Pinto
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann
> Acked-by: Rob Herring
> ---
> Changes v8->v11:
> - Nothing changed (just to keep up with patch
Adding UFS 2.0 support to the UFS core driver.
Signed-off-by: Joao Pinto
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann
Acked-by: Rob Herring
---
Changes v8->v11:
- Nothing changed (just to keep up with patch set version).
Changes v7->v8:
- Added "jedec, ufs-2.0" to the ufschd-platform compatibility strings Changes
>
> On 03/11/2016 02:43 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >> "Arnd" == Arnd Bergmann writes:
> >
> > Arnd> Looking through what other drivers do, I've found a couple of
> > Arnd> patterns now. n particular, most use the SG_IO ioctl to pass down
> > Arnd> commands from user space into a device s
> Currently we use the host quirks mechanism in order to
> handle both device and host controller quirks.
> In order to support various of UFS devices we should separate
> handling the device quirks from the host controller's.
>
> Reviewed-by: Gilad Broner
> Signed-off-by: Raviv Shvili
> Signed-
> Some of the data structures (like response UPIU) and/or its elements
> (unused fields) should be cleared before sending out the respective
> command to UFS device.
>
> This change clears the UPIU response data structure for query commands
> and NOP command before sending out the command. We al
> + cdb_len = min_t(unsigned short, lrbp->cmd->cmd_len, MAX_CDB_SIZE);
> + memcpy(ucd_req_ptr->sc.cdb, lrbp->cmd->cmnd, cdb_len);
> + if (cdb_len < MAX_CDB_SIZE)
> + memset(ucd_req_ptr->sc.cdb + cdb_len, 0,
> +(MAX_CDB_SIZE - cdb_len));
It's just 16 byt
>
> On Sun, 2015-08-30 at 10:36 +, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm just not sure why the patches are not merged or even rejected.
> > > >
> > > > Because ideally I want a Maintainer ack.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm just not sure why the patches are not merged or even rejected.
> >
> > Because ideally I want a Maintainer ack. That's Doug Gilbert.
James
The patches were discussed and the ACked by Doug in February and reviewed again
after resend by Martin Petersen
> >
> > > I'm submi
> > + /* this should never happen */
> > + if (WARN_ON(!cmnd))
> > + return SCSI_MLQUEUE_HOST_BUSY;
> >
> > - if (NULL == cmnd || NULL == devip) {
> > - pr_warn("called with NULL cmnd or devip pointer\n");
> > + if (NULL == devip) {
> > + pr_warn("called devip
> Correct, so if the app client sets an allocation length
> of 3, then at your discretion, you can either leave the
> code doing what it does now, or return those 3 bytes.
> IOW leave it alone, improve it but don't make it worse.
Ack, got the new spec and looks like the check < 4 is the correct on
> On 15-02-24 04:37 PM, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > 1. Fix the error check: the alloc length should be > 16
> > and not > 4
>
> You are proposing to make a marginally incorrect test
> completely incorrect!
Quoting from the spec:
The ALLOCATION LENGTH field is defined in 2.2.6. The allocation length
> > @@ -3947,11 +3947,18 @@ schedule_resp(struct scsi_cmnd *cmnd, struct
> sdebug_dev_info *devip,
> > struct sdebug_queued_cmd *sqcp = NULL;
> > struct scsi_device *sdp = cmnd->device;
>
> This patch seems incorrect because it still dereferences
> cmnd (in the above line) before it checks
45 matches
Mail list logo
