On 11/13/2015 11:28 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015, Lu, Baolu wrote:

On 11/13/2015 12:20 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, Lu Baolu wrote:

Commit 655fe4effe0f ("usbcore: add sysfs support to xHCI usb3
hardware LPM") introduced usb3_hardware_lpm sysfs node. This
doesn't show the correct status of USB3 U1 and U2 LPM status.

This patch fixes this by replacing usb3_hardware_lpm with two
nodes, usb3_hardware_lpm_u1 (for U1) and usb3_hardware_lpm_u2
(for U2), and recording the U1/U2 LPM status in right places.

This patch should be back-ported to kernels as old as 4.3,
that contains Commit 655fe4effe0f ("usbcore: add sysfs support
to xHCI usb3 hardware LPM").

Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu...@linux.intel.com>
...

--- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
@@ -3875,17 +3875,23 @@ static void usb_enable_link_state(struct usb_hcd *hcd, 
struct usb_device *udev,
                return;
        }
- if (usb_set_lpm_timeout(udev, state, timeout))
+       ret = usb_set_lpm_timeout(udev, state, timeout);
+       if (ret)
                /* If we can't set the parent hub U1/U2 timeout,
                 * device-initiated LPM won't be allowed either, so let the xHCI
                 * host know that this link state won't be enabled.
                 */
                hcd->driver->disable_usb3_lpm_timeout(hcd, udev, state);
-
        /* Only a configured device will accept the Set Feature U1/U2_ENABLE */
        else if (udev->actconfig)
                usb_set_device_initiated_lpm(udev, state, true);
+ if (!ret) {
+               if (state == USB3_LPM_U1)
+                       udev->usb3_lpm_u1_enabled = 1;
+               else if (state == USB3_LPM_U2)
+                       udev->usb3_lpm_u2_enabled = 1;
+       }
This doesn't look right at all.  What happens if ret is 0 but the
device isn't configured?  You'll set the usb3_lpm_u*_enabled flag even
though LPM isn't really enabled.

Don't you want to set these flags inside the
usb_set_device_initiated_lpm() function, where you know whether the
action succeeded?  And leave this routine unchanged?
My understand is that both hub and device can initiate LPM.
As soon as usb_set_lpm_timeout(valid_timeout_value)
returns 0, the hub-initiated LPM is enabled. Thus, LPM is
enabled no matter the result of usb_set_device_initiated_lpm().
The only difference is whether device is able to initiate LPM.

On disable side, as soon as usb_set_lpm_timeout(0) return 0,
hub initiated LPM is disabled. Hub will disallows link to enter
U1/U2 as well, even device is initiating LPM. Hence LPM
is disabled as soon as hub LPM timeout set to 0, no matter
device-initiated LPM is disabled or not.
Then maybe you can add a comment explaining this.

Yes, I will add comments for this.


The patch still looks strange, though.  Your new code does this:

        ret = usb_set_lpm_timeout(...);
        if (ret)
                ...
        else if (udev->actconfig)
                ...
        if (!ret) {
                if (state == USB3_LPM_U1)
                ...
        }

It would be better to do this:

        if (usb_set_lpm_timeout(...)) {
                ...
        } else {
                if (udev->actconfig)
                        ...
                if (state == USB3_LPM_U1)
                ...
        }

Yes, this looks better. I will refactor this part of code.


Alan Stern


Thank you.
-Baolu


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to