[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.2001031137290.1560-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2020 11:54:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
cc: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <acelan.kao@...onical.com>,
<linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] USB: Disable LPM on WD19's Realtek Hub during setting
its ports to U0
On Sat, 4 Jan 2020, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> > On Jan 3, 2020, at 23:21, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 3 Jan 2020, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> >
> >> Realtek Hub (0bda:0x0487) used in Dell Dock WD19 sometimes drops off the
> >> bus when bringing underlying ports from U3 to U0.
> >>
> >> After some expirements and guessworks, the hub itself needs to be U0
> >> during setting its port's link state back to U0.
> >>
> >> So add a new quirk to let the hub disables LPM on setting U0 for its
> >> downstream facing ports.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/usb/core/hub.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> >> drivers/usb/core/quirks.c | 7 +++++++
> >> include/linux/usb/quirks.h | 3 +++
> >> 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> >> index f229ad6952c0..35a035781c5a 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> >> @@ -3533,9 +3533,17 @@ int usb_port_resume(struct usb_device *udev, pm_message_t msg)
> >> }
> >>
> >> /* see 7.1.7.7; affects power usage, but not budgeting */
> >> - if (hub_is_superspeed(hub->hdev))
> >> + if (hub_is_superspeed(hub->hdev)) {
> >> + if (hub->hdev->quirks & USB_QUIRK_DISABLE_LPM_ON_U0) {
> >> + usb_lock_device(hub->hdev);
> >> + usb_unlocked_disable_lpm(hub->hdev);
> >> + }
> >> status = hub_set_port_link_state(hub, port1, USB_SS_PORT_LS_U0);
> >> - else
> >> + if (hub->hdev->quirks & USB_QUIRK_DISABLE_LPM_ON_U0) {
> >> + usb_unlocked_enable_lpm(hub->hdev);
> >> + usb_unlock_device(hub->hdev);
> >
> > The locking here seems questionable. Doesn't this code sometimes get
> > called with the hub already locked? Or with the child device locked
> > (in which case locking the hub would violate the normal locking order:
> > parent first, child second)?
I did a little checking. In many cases the child device _will_ be
locked at this point.
> Maybe introduce a new lock? The lock however will only be used by this specific hub.
> But I still want the LPM can be enabled for this hub.
Do you really need to lock the hub at all? What would the lock protect
against?
Alan Stern
Powered by blists - more mailing lists