linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 2/5] usb: dwc3: core: Host wake up support from system suspend

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 17 Nov 2021 11:31:55 +0530
From:   Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>
To:     Sandeep Maheswaram <quic_c_sanm@...cinc.com>
CC:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        "Matthias Kaehlcke" <mka@...omium.org>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>,
        <quic_ppratap@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/5] usb: dwc3: core: Host wake up support from system
 suspend

Hi Sandeep,

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 01:23:41PM +0530, Sandeep Maheswaram wrote:
> Avoiding phy powerdown when wakeup capable devices are connected
> by checking wakeup property of xhci plat device.
> Phy should be on to wake up the device from suspend using wakeup capable
> devices such as keyboard and mouse.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sandeep Maheswaram <quic_c_sanm@...cinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c | 7 +++++--
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
> index 643239d..a6ad0ed 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
> @@ -1787,7 +1787,7 @@ static int dwc3_suspend_common(struct dwc3 *dwc, pm_message_t msg)
>  		dwc3_core_exit(dwc);
>  		break;
>  	case DWC3_GCTL_PRTCAP_HOST:
> -		if (!PMSG_IS_AUTO(msg)) {
> +		if (!PMSG_IS_AUTO(msg) && !device_may_wakeup(&dwc->xhci->dev)) {
>  			dwc3_core_exit(dwc);
>  			break;
>  		}
> @@ -1848,13 +1848,16 @@ static int dwc3_resume_common(struct dwc3 *dwc, pm_message_t msg)
>  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dwc->lock, flags);
>  		break;
>  	case DWC3_GCTL_PRTCAP_HOST:
> -		if (!PMSG_IS_AUTO(msg)) {
> +		if (!PMSG_IS_AUTO(msg) && !device_may_wakeup(&dwc->xhci->dev)) {
>  			ret = dwc3_core_init_for_resume(dwc);
>  			if (ret)
>  				return ret;
>  			dwc3_set_prtcap(dwc, DWC3_GCTL_PRTCAP_HOST);
>  			break;
> +		} else {
> +			dwc3_set_prtcap(dwc, DWC3_GCTL_PRTCAP_HOST);
>  		}
> +
During runtime resume, we enter else block and call dwc3_set_prtcap() which
is not done before. Is that intentional?

Thanks,
Pavan