[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5b82de52-3d6d-214b-ba3b-c57315fd18cb@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 17:51:46 -0700
From: Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>
To: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>,
"balbi@...nel.org" <balbi@...nel.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"quic_jackp@...cinc.com" <quic_jackp@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/8] usb: dwc3: Increase DWC3 controller halt timeout
Hi Thinh,
On 8/16/2022 5:34 PM, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
> On 8/15/2022, Wesley Cheng wrote:
>> Since EP0 transactions need to be completed before the controller halt
>> sequence is finished, this may take some time depending on the host and the
>> enabled functions. Increase the controller halt timeout, so that we give
>> the controller sufficient time to handle EP0 transfers. Remove the need
>> for making dwc3_gadget_suspend() and dwc3_gadget_resume() to be called in
>> a spinlock.
>
> Sounds like the removal of the spin_lock and the increase of halt
> timeout are 2 separate change. It would be nice to separate this patch
> since the $subject only indicates 1 of them.
>
Sure, I'll split these up.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c | 4 ----
>> drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c | 8 +++++++-
>> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
>> index c5c238ab3083..23e123a1ab5f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
>> @@ -1976,9 +1976,7 @@ static int dwc3_suspend_common(struct dwc3 *dwc, pm_message_t msg)
>> case DWC3_GCTL_PRTCAP_DEVICE:
>> if (pm_runtime_suspended(dwc->dev))
>> break;
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&dwc->lock, flags);
>> dwc3_gadget_suspend(dwc);
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dwc->lock, flags);
>> synchronize_irq(dwc->irq_gadget);
>> dwc3_core_exit(dwc);
>> break;
>> @@ -2039,9 +2037,7 @@ static int dwc3_resume_common(struct dwc3 *dwc, pm_message_t msg)
>> return ret;
>>
>> dwc3_set_prtcap(dwc, DWC3_GCTL_PRTCAP_DEVICE);
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&dwc->lock, flags);
>> dwc3_gadget_resume(dwc);
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dwc->lock, flags);
>> break;
>> case DWC3_GCTL_PRTCAP_HOST:
>> if (!PMSG_IS_AUTO(msg) && !device_can_wakeup(dwc->dev)) {
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>> index 7b66a54250a0..b2668a83cc29 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>> @@ -2444,7 +2444,7 @@ static void __dwc3_gadget_set_speed(struct dwc3 *dwc)
>> static int dwc3_gadget_run_stop(struct dwc3 *dwc, int is_on, int suspend)
>> {
>> u32 reg;
>> - u32 timeout = 500;
>> + u32 timeout = 100;
>>
>> if (pm_runtime_suspended(dwc->dev))
>> return 0;
>> @@ -2477,6 +2477,7 @@ static int dwc3_gadget_run_stop(struct dwc3 *dwc, int is_on, int suspend)
>> dwc3_gadget_dctl_write_safe(dwc, reg);
>>
>> do {
>> + msleep(20);
>
> Polling interval of 20ms seems a bit much. Can we use usleep_range()
> between 1-2ms?
>
> Thanks,
> Thinh
Sounds good. Let me reduce the interval gap and resubmit.
Thanks
Wesley Cheng
>
>> reg = dwc3_readl(dwc->regs, DWC3_DSTS);
>> reg &= DWC3_DSTS_DEVCTRLHLT;
>> } while (--timeout && !(!is_on ^ !reg));
>> @@ -4520,12 +4521,17 @@ void dwc3_gadget_exit(struct dwc3 *dwc)
>>
>> int dwc3_gadget_suspend(struct dwc3 *dwc)
>> {
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> +
>> if (!dwc->gadget_driver)
>> return 0;
>>
>> dwc3_gadget_run_stop(dwc, false, false);
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&dwc->lock, flags);
>> dwc3_disconnect_gadget(dwc);
>> __dwc3_gadget_stop(dwc);
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dwc->lock, flags);
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists