RE: [PATCH v1 0/3] scsi: ufs: add error handlings of auto-hibern8

On 13/05/2019 16:36, Stanley Chu wrote:

quoted

Currently auto-hibern8 is activated if host supports
auto-hibern8 capability. However no error handlings are existed thus
this feature is kind of risky.

This last sentence is not very idiomatic.

I would suggest:
"However, error-handling is not implemented, which makes the feature
somewhat risky."

quoted

If "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail happens

I would suggest:
If either "Hibernate Enter" or "Hibernate Exit" fail during ...

quoted

during auto-hibern8 flow, the corresponding interrupt
"UIC_HIBERNATE_ENTER" or "UIC_HIBERNATE_EXIT" shall be raised
according to UFS specification.

This patch adds auto-hibern8 error handlings:

error-handling

quoted

- Monitor "Hibernate Enter" and "Hibernate Exit" interrupts after
  auto-hibern8 feature is activated.

I just want to take this opportunity to ask a rhetorical question.

Who in the Great Heavens thought it would be a good idea to call the
feature "auto-hibern8" ?

Was it really worth it to save 2 characters by writing "8" instead
of "ate" ?

This bugs me so much that I just might send a patch to fix it up.

As strange as it may be, this is not the product of the creative mind
Of the original driver's authors, nor even JEDEC guys which uses it in
their specs (both UFS & HCI).
This strange amalgam dates back to the mipi-unipro terminology.

Thanks,
Avri
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel