[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57398451.2060103@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 11:26:57 +0300
From: Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>
To: Peter Chen <hzpeterchen@...il.com>
CC: <peter.chen@...escale.com>, <balbi@...nel.org>, <tony@...mide.com>,
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
<mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>, <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>,
<sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>, <jun.li@...escale.com>,
<grygorii.strashko@...com>, <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
<robh@...nel.org>, <nsekhar@...com>, <b-liu@...com>,
<linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 13/14] usb: gadget: udc: adapt to OTG core
Hi,
On 16/05/16 10:02, Peter Chen wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 01:03:27PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> +
>> +static int usb_gadget_connect_control(struct usb_gadget *gadget, bool connect)
>> +{
>> + struct usb_udc *udc;
>> +
>> + mutex_lock(&udc_lock);
>> + udc = usb_gadget_to_udc(gadget);
>> + if (!udc) {
>> + dev_err(gadget->dev.parent, "%s: gadget not registered.\n",
>> + __func__);
>> + mutex_unlock(&udc_lock);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (connect) {
>> + if (!gadget->connected)
>> + usb_gadget_connect(udc->gadget);
>> + } else {
>> + if (gadget->connected) {
>> + usb_gadget_disconnect(udc->gadget);
>> + udc->driver->disconnect(udc->gadget);
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + mutex_unlock(&udc_lock);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>
> Since this is called for vbus interrupt, why not using
> usb_udc_vbus_handler directly, and call udc->driver->disconnect
> at usb_gadget_stop.
We can't assume that this is always called for vbus interrupt so
I decided not to call usb_udc_vbus_handler.
udc->vbus is really pointless for us. We keep vbus states in our
state machine and leave udc->vbus as ture always.
Why do you want to move udc->driver->disconnect() to stop?
If USB controller disconnected from bus then the gadget driver
must be notified about the disconnect immediately. The controller
may or may not be stopped by the core.
>
>> return 0;
>> @@ -660,9 +830,15 @@ static ssize_t usb_udc_softconn_store(struct device *dev,
>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> }
>>
>> + /* In OTG mode we don't support softconnect, but b_bus_req */
>> + if (udc->gadget->otg_dev) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "soft-connect not supported in OTG mode\n");
>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + }
>> +
>
> The soft-connect can be supported at dual-role mode currently, we can
> use b_bus_req entry once it is implemented later.
Soft-connect should be done via sysfs handling within the OTG core.
This can be added later. I don't want anything outside the OTG core
to handle soft-connect behaviour as it will be hard to keep things
in sync.
I can update the comment to something like this.
/* In OTG/dual-role mode, soft-connect should be handled by OTG core */
>
>> if (sysfs_streq(buf, "connect")) {
>> usb_gadget_udc_start(udc);
>> - usb_gadget_connect(udc->gadget);
>> + usb_udc_connect_control(udc);
>
> This line seems to be not related with this patch.
>
Right. I'll remove it.
cheers,
-roger
Powered by blists - more mailing lists