On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 11:26:57AM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16/05/16 10:02, Peter Chen wrote:
> > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 01:03:27PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >> +
> >> +static int usb_gadget_connect_control(struct usb_gadget *gadget, bool
> >> connect)
> >> +{
> >> + struct usb_udc *udc;
> >> +
> >> + mutex_lock(&udc_lock);
> >> + udc = usb_gadget_to_udc(gadget);
> >> + if (!udc) {
> >> + dev_err(gadget->dev.parent, "%s: gadget not registered.\n",
> >> + __func__);
> >> + mutex_unlock(&udc_lock);
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + if (connect) {
> >> + if (!gadget->connected)
> >> + usb_gadget_connect(udc->gadget);
> >> + } else {
> >> + if (gadget->connected) {
> >> + usb_gadget_disconnect(udc->gadget);
> >> + udc->driver->disconnect(udc->gadget);
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + mutex_unlock(&udc_lock);
> >> +
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >
> > Since this is called for vbus interrupt, why not using
> > usb_udc_vbus_handler directly, and call udc->driver->disconnect
> > at usb_gadget_stop.
>
> We can't assume that this is always called for vbus interrupt so
> I decided not to call usb_udc_vbus_handler.
>
> udc->vbus is really pointless for us. We keep vbus states in our
> state machine and leave udc->vbus as ture always.
>
> Why do you want to move udc->driver->disconnect() to stop?
> If USB controller disconnected from bus then the gadget driver
> must be notified about the disconnect immediately. The controller
> may or may not be stopped by the core.
>
Then, would you give some comments when this API will be used?
I was assumed it is only used for drd state machine.
> >
> >> return 0;
> >> @@ -660,9 +830,15 @@ static ssize_t usb_udc_softconn_store(struct device
> >> *dev,
> >> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> }
> >>
> >> + /* In OTG mode we don't support softconnect, but b_bus_req */
> >> + if (udc->gadget->otg_dev) {
> >> + dev_err(dev, "soft-connect not supported in OTG mode\n");
> >> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >
> > The soft-connect can be supported at dual-role mode currently, we can
> > use b_bus_req entry once it is implemented later.
>
> Soft-connect should be done via sysfs handling within the OTG core.
> This can be added later. I don't want anything outside the OTG core
> to handle soft-connect behaviour as it will be hard to keep things
> in sync.
>
> I can update the comment to something like this.
>
> /* In OTG/dual-role mode, soft-connect should be handled by OTG core */
Ok, let's Felipe decide it.
>
> >
> >> if (sysfs_streq(buf, "connect")) {
> >> usb_gadget_udc_start(udc);
> >> - usb_gadget_connect(udc->gadget);
> >> + usb_udc_connect_control(udc);
> >
> > This line seems to be not related with this patch.
> >
> Right. I'll remove it.
>
> cheers,
> -roger
--
Best Regards,
Peter Chen
