Hi Adam,
On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 05:03:09PM +0000, Adam Thomson wrote:
> This commit adds definitions for PD Rev 3.0 messages, including
> APDO PPS and extended message support for TCPM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adam Thomson <adam.thomson.opensou...@diasemi.com>
> ---
> include/linux/usb/pd.h | 162
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 151 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/usb/pd.h b/include/linux/usb/pd.h
> index e00051c..77c6cd6 100644
> --- a/include/linux/usb/pd.h
> +++ b/include/linux/usb/pd.h
<snip>
> #define PD_REV10 0x0
> #define PD_REV20 0x1
> +#define PD_REV30 0x2
>
> +#define PD_HEADER_EXT_HDR BIT(15)
> #define PD_HEADER_CNT_SHIFT 12
> #define PD_HEADER_CNT_MASK 0x7
> #define PD_HEADER_ID_SHIFT 9
> @@ -59,18 +91,19 @@ enum pd_data_msg_type {
> #define PD_HEADER_REV_MASK 0x3
> #define PD_HEADER_DATA_ROLE BIT(5)
> #define PD_HEADER_TYPE_SHIFT 0
> -#define PD_HEADER_TYPE_MASK 0xf
> +#define PD_HEADER_TYPE_MASK 0x1f
>
> -#define PD_HEADER(type, pwr, data, id, cnt) \
> +#define PD_HEADER(type, pwr, data, id, cnt, ext_hdr) \
> ((((type) & PD_HEADER_TYPE_MASK) << PD_HEADER_TYPE_SHIFT) | \
> ((pwr) == TYPEC_SOURCE ? PD_HEADER_PWR_ROLE : 0) | \
> ((data) == TYPEC_HOST ? PD_HEADER_DATA_ROLE : 0) | \
> - (PD_REV20 << PD_HEADER_REV_SHIFT) | \
> + (PD_REV30 << PD_HEADER_REV_SHIFT) | \
You are making a hardcoded change for the Spec Rev field of every
outgoing message to be 3.0. However, this needs to be flexible in order
to support backwards compatibility when communicating with a 2.0 peer.
The revision "negotiation" would need to be done at the time the first
Request is sent such that both source & sink settle on the highest
supported revision of both. (PD 3.0 spec section 6.2.1.1.5)
> (((id) & PD_HEADER_ID_MASK) << PD_HEADER_ID_SHIFT) | \
> - (((cnt) & PD_HEADER_CNT_MASK) << PD_HEADER_CNT_SHIFT))
> + (((cnt) & PD_HEADER_CNT_MASK) << PD_HEADER_CNT_SHIFT) | \
> + ((ext_hdr) ? PD_HEADER_EXT_HDR : 0))
>
> #define PD_HEADER_LE(type, pwr, data, id, cnt) \
> - cpu_to_le16(PD_HEADER((type), (pwr), (data), (id), (cnt)))
> + cpu_to_le16(PD_HEADER((type), (pwr), (data), (id), (cnt), (0)))
>
> static inline unsigned int pd_header_cnt(u16 header)
> {
> @@ -102,16 +135,66 @@ static inline unsigned int pd_header_msgid_le(__le16
> header)
> return pd_header_msgid(le16_to_cpu(header));
> }
>
> +#define PD_EXT_HDR_CHUNKED BIT(15)
> +#define PD_EXT_HDR_CHUNK_NUM_SHIFT 11
> +#define PD_EXT_HDR_CHUNK_NUM_MASK 0xf
> +#define PD_EXT_HDR_REQ_CHUNK BIT(10)
> +#define PD_EXT_HDR_DATA_SIZE_SHIFT 0
> +#define PD_EXT_HDR_DATA_SIZE_MASK 0x1ff
> +
> +#define PD_EXT_HDR(data_size, req_chunk, chunk_num, chunked)
> \
> + ((((data_size) & PD_EXT_HDR_DATA_SIZE_MASK) <<
> PD_EXT_HDR_DATA_SIZE_SHIFT) | \
> + ((req_chunk) ? PD_EXT_HDR_REQ_CHUNK : 0) |
> \
> + (((chunk_num) & PD_EXT_HDR_CHUNK_NUM_MASK) <<
> PD_EXT_HDR_CHUNK_NUM_SHIFT) | \
> + ((chunked) ? PD_EXT_HDR_CHUNKED : 0))
> +
> +#define PD_EXT_HDR_LE(data_size, req_chunk, chunk_num, chunked) \
> + cpu_to_le16(PD_EXT_HDR((data_size), (req_chunk), (chunk_num),
> (chunked)))
> +
> +static inline unsigned int pd_ext_header_chunk_num(u16 ext_header)
> +{
> + return (ext_header >> PD_EXT_HDR_CHUNK_NUM_SHIFT) &
> + PD_EXT_HDR_CHUNK_NUM_MASK;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned int pd_ext_header_data_size(u16 ext_header)
> +{
> + return (ext_header >> PD_EXT_HDR_DATA_SIZE_SHIFT) &
> + PD_EXT_HDR_DATA_SIZE_MASK;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned int pd_ext_header_data_size_le(__le16 ext_header)
> +{
> + return pd_ext_header_data_size(le16_to_cpu(ext_header));
> +}
> +
> #define PD_MAX_PAYLOAD 7
> +#define PD_EXT_MAX_LEGACY_DATA 26
> +#define PD_EXT_MAX_CHUNK_DATA 26
> +#define PD_EXT_MAX_DATA 260
>
> /**
> - * struct pd_message - PD message as seen on wire
> - * @header: PD message header
> - * @payload: PD message payload
> - */
> + * struct pd_ext_message_data - PD extended message data as seen on wire
> + * @header: PD extended message header
> + * @data: PD extended message data
> + */
> +struct pd_ext_message_data {
> + __le16 header;
> + u8 data[PD_EXT_MAX_DATA];
> +} __packed;
> +
> +/**
> + * struct pd_message - PD message as seen on wire
> + * @header: PD message header
> + * @payload: PD message payload
> + * @ext_msg: PD message extended message data
> + */
> struct pd_message {
> __le16 header;
> - __le32 payload[PD_MAX_PAYLOAD];
> + union {
> + __le32 payload[PD_MAX_PAYLOAD];
> + struct pd_ext_message_data ext_msg;
> + };
> } __packed;
It seems that this structure just got ~9-10x fatter (28 byte payload ->
262 bytes). Just wondering if this has a noticeable impact on
(performance, memory) considering the various places in TCPM where
struct pd_message is stack-allocated? And for RX, we have more to
malloc/memcpy in tcpm_pd_receive().
Thanks,
Jack
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
