[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C8FB60D.1080906@ru.mvista.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 21:51:09 +0400
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...sta.com>
To: balbi@...com
CC: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...sta.com>,
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>,
"greg@...ah.com" <greg@...ah.com>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
"Gadiyar, Anand" <gadiyar@...com>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND/PATCH 5/6] USB: musb-gadget: complete request only if
data is transfered over
Hello.
Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> If a DMA interrupt comes when the whole transfer is not yet
>> complete (and
>> other Ming Lei's patches are making this possible),
Oh, here I mixed some other patch with Ming Lei's ones...
>> it will pass due to the
> than this is the actual problem, no ? If we're using mode1 dma (as we
> are on tx path), we should only get dma interrupt when the whole
> transfer has been completed.
The Inventra DMA controller has serious DMA length limitation, so the whole
transfer may take more than one DMA.
>> 'ís_dma' condition above the patched code:
>> if (is_dma || request->actual == request->length) {
>> and then it will hit the code sending the final ZLP (above this
>> patched code too):
> but this was already there before the patch.
Yes, and here lies the problem.
>> /*
>> * First, maybe a terminating short packet.
>> Some DMA
>> * engines might handle this by themselves.
>> */
>> if ((request->zero && request->length
>> && request->length %
>> musb_ep->packet_sz == 0)
>> #ifdef CONFIG_USB_INVENTRA_DMA
>> || (is_dma && (!dma->desired_mode ||
>> (request->actual &
>> (musb_ep->packet_sz -
>> 1))))
>> #endif
>> ) {
>> before the transfer is complete while it should only be hit when and
>> only when
>> the whole transfer is complete. The current code doesn't look correct
>> as well
>> though, all due to this 'ís_dma' condition. Surely this needs fixing.
> likewise, this was there before the patch. I don't think the real
> problem lies with this patch, it's been there for a while, don't you
> agree ?
Then what problem this patch fixes, if not this one?
> the problem is not on the extra if () added below the quoted code,
> it's on the quoted code itself, which wasn't changed in any way.
Let me repeat: in the PIO mode the added check is just duplicate, in the DMA
mode it's added too late in the code, after ZLP/short packet send is triggered.
We should modify the check at the top of that code instead.
WBR, Sergei
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists