[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ff0bff8b-f26a-87bd-9762-9f2af98abcca@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 13:13:38 -0800
From: Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>
To: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>,
<srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>, <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
<perex@...ex.cz>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <corbet@....net>,
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
<andersson@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
<konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>,
<broonie@...nel.org>, <bgoswami@...cinc.com>, <tiwai@...e.com>,
<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <agross@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-sound@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
<alsa-devel@...a-project.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 04/41] usb: host: xhci-mem: Cleanup pending secondary
event ring events
Hi Mathias,
On 1/16/2024 12:24 PM, Wesley Cheng wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
>
> On 1/15/2024 6:01 AM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
>> On 10.1.2024 1.42, Wesley Cheng wrote:
>>> Hi Mathias,
>>>
>>> On 1/8/2024 12:51 PM, Wesley Cheng wrote:
>>>> Hi Mathias,
>>>>
>>>> On 1/4/2024 6:48 AM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
>>>>> On 2.1.2024 23.45, Wesley Cheng wrote:
>>>>>> As part of xHCI bus suspend, the XHCI is halted. However, if
>>>>>> there are
>>>>>> pending events in the secondary event ring, it is observed that
>>>>>> the xHCI
>>>>>> controller stops responding to further commands upon host or device
>>>>>> initiated bus resume. Iterate through all pending events and
>>>>>> update the
>>>>>> dequeue pointer to the beginning of the event ring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>> + * Move the event ring dequeue pointer to skip events kept in the
>>>>>> secondary
>>>>>> + * event ring. This is used to ensure that pending events in the
>>>>>> ring are
>>>>>> + * acknowledged, so the XHCI HCD can properly enter
>>>>>> suspend/resume. The
>>>>>> + * secondary ring is typically maintained by an external component.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +void xhci_skip_sec_intr_events(struct xhci_hcd *xhci,
>>>>>> + struct xhci_ring *ring, struct xhci_interrupter *ir)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + union xhci_trb *erdp_trb, *current_trb;
>>>>>> + u64 erdp_reg;
>>>>>> + u32 iman_reg;
>>>>>> + dma_addr_t deq;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* disable irq, ack pending interrupt and ack all pending
>>>>>> events */
>>>>>> + xhci_disable_interrupter(ir);
>>>>>> + iman_reg = readl_relaxed(&ir->ir_set->irq_pending);
>>>>>> + if (iman_reg & IMAN_IP)
>>>>>> + writel_relaxed(iman_reg, &ir->ir_set->irq_pending);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* last acked event trb is in erdp reg */
>>>>>> + erdp_reg = xhci_read_64(xhci, &ir->ir_set->erst_dequeue);
>>>>>> + deq = (dma_addr_t)(erdp_reg & ERST_PTR_MASK);
>>>>>> + if (!deq) {
>>>>>> + xhci_err(xhci, "event ring handling not required\n");
>>>>>> + return;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + erdp_trb = current_trb = ir->event_ring->dequeue;
>>>>>> + /* read cycle state of the last acked trb to find out CCS */
>>>>>> + ring->cycle_state = le32_to_cpu(current_trb->event_cmd.flags)
>>>>>> & TRB_CYCLE;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + while (1) {
>>>>>> + inc_deq(xhci, ir->event_ring);
>>>>>> + erdp_trb = ir->event_ring->dequeue;
>>>>>> + /* cycle state transition */
>>>>>> + if ((le32_to_cpu(erdp_trb->event_cmd.flags) & TRB_CYCLE) !=
>>>>>> + ring->cycle_state)
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + xhci_update_erst_dequeue(xhci, ir, current_trb, true);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> Code above is very similar to the existing event ring processing
>>>>> parts of xhci_irq()
>>>>> and xhci_handle_event()
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll see if I can refactor the existing event ring processing,
>>>>> decouple it from
>>>>> event handling so that it could be used by primary and secondary
>>>>> interrupters with
>>>>> handlers, and this case where we just want to clear the event ring.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, that makes sense. Will take a look as well.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How about something like the below? Tested this on my set up and
>>> everything looks to be working fine. Had to add another param to
>>> struct xhci_interrupters to tell the XHCI interrupt handler to say if
>>> that particular interrupter wants to skip_events (handling). This
>>> way, its something that the class driver utilizing the interrupter
>>> will have to tell XHCI sideband. It would allow the user to
>>> determine if they want to use the interrupter to actually handle
>>> events or not on the proc running Linux.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I have something similar.
>> I'll share it soon, just need to
>> clean it up a bit fist.
>>
>
> Sure, no worries. Will test it when its available. Thanks!
>
Was just wondering if you had the time to clean up the changes? If not,
maybe you can provide a patch with whatever you have, and I can try my
best to clean it up to your liking? Thanks!
Thanks
Wesley Cheng
Powered by blists - more mailing lists