[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e2e4bb4e-6e49-44f6-b7c7-cde274a8784b@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 15:00:32 +0530
From: AKASH KUMAR <quic_akakum@...cinc.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
Pratham Pratap
<quic_ppratap@...cinc.com>,
Jack Pham <quic_jackp@...cinc.com>, <kernel@...cinc.com>,
Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>,
"Vijayavardhan
Vennapusa" <quic_vvreddy@...cinc.com>,
Krishna Kurapati
<quic_kriskura@...cinc.com>,
<linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: pci-quirks: Skip usb_early_handoff for Renesas PCI
USB
On 5/21/2024 3:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 02:55:13PM +0530, AKASH KUMAR wrote:
>> Hi Greg, On 5/21/2024 1:35 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 01:16:35PM +0530, Akash Kumar wrote:
>>>> Skip usb_early_handoff for the Renesas PCI USB controller due to
>>>> the firmware not being loaded beforehand, which impacts the bootup
>>>> time. Signed-off-by: Akash Kumar<quic_akakum@...cinc.com>
>>> What commit id does this fix? Should it go to stable kernels? yes it
>>> can go to stable kernels, issue is seen on every target with usb
>>> over pcie support.
>>>> --- drivers/usb/host/pci-quirks.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5
>>>> insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/pci-quirks.c
>>>> b/drivers/usb/host/pci-quirks.c index 0b949acfa258..a0770ecc0861
>>>> 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/host/pci-quirks.c +++
>>>> b/drivers/usb/host/pci-quirks.c @@ -1264,6 +1264,11 @@ static void
>>>> quirk_usb_early_handoff(struct pci_dev *pdev) } } + /* Skip handoff
>>>> for Renesas PCI USB controller on QCOM SOC */ + if ((pdev->vendor
>>>> == PCI_VENDOR_ID_RENESAS) && + (pcie_find_root_port(pdev)->vendor
>>>> == PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM))
>>> Why are all Renesas PCI devices on a QCOM host to be marked this
>>> way? That's a very big hammer for potentially lots of devices. Have
>>> you tested them all?
>> firmware loading is being done in HLOS, not UEFI, if firmware loading
>> is done in UEFI, then calling early_handoff() API makes sense, else
>> it is checking for controller ready without firmware loaded which is
>> impacting boot up time by 5 sec roughly. We are seeing problem in all
>> targets having usb over pcie support.
> But the bootloader has nothing to do with the device type of the
> devices here, right? Why not properly trigger this off of the needed
> firmware location instead of here? What happens when you have a system
> using UEFI that matches these two devices and the change causes them
> to break? In other words, test the proper thing, and only for the
> specific devices you need to have the change for, don't be overly
> broad like you are doing here, as you might break other systems that
> you do not have in front of you at the moment.
yeah currently we don't have any uefi based targets, will add target specific check.
Thanks,
Akash
Powered by blists - more mailing lists