Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] usb: musb: core: Handle Babble condition only in HOST mode
On 5/23/2014 2:12 AM, Bin Liu wrote:
Hi George,
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:32 PM, George Cherian wrote:
Hi Bin,
On 5/19/2014 9:24 PM, Bin Liu wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:39 AM, George Cherian
wrote:
BABBLE and RESET share the same interrupt. The interrupt
is considered to be RESET if MUSB is in peripheral mode and
as a BABBLE if MUSB is in HOST mode.
Handle babble condition iff MUSB is in HOST mode.
Signed-off-by: George Cherian
---
drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
index 61da471..eff3c5c 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
@@ -849,7 +849,7 @@ b_host:
}
/* handle babble condition */
- if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE)
+ if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE && is_host_active(musb))
schedule_work(&musb->recover_work);
I guess my following comments are for Daniel's patch as while which
initially added the babble work.
Should this if statement be merged into the previous 'if(int_usb &
MUSB_INTR_RESET)' one, which handles the same interrupt and already
handles host and device mode respectively.
Initially I too had the babble handling as part of 'if(int_usb &
MUSB_INTR_RESET)'
one. But during my tests I hit a corner case where in we hit a BABBLE
condition
on disconnect. In such case the babble interrupt can be handled only if we
have a seperate
check, else its considered as a BUS RESET.
When all devices are disconnected MUSB_DEVCTL_HM = 0 and the code always
enter the
else path. In this path it treats the BABBLE as a BUS RESET.
The code flow is a bit confusing, two if() handle the same interrupt.
The second one implied using 'handled = IRQ_HANDLED;' from the first
one.
Also does the switch() in else{} in the first if() cause any side effect?
No it doesn't.
Since this babble handing is AM335x specific, how about handle it in
dsps_interrupt() in musb_dsps.c, which already has an entry for babble
interrupt? TI 3.2 kernel does this way.
That the reason we have platform specific callbacks added from the main
interrupt handler.
Regards,
-Bin.
Regards,
-Bin.
#if 0
--
1.8.3.1
--
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
--
-George
--
-George
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] usb: musb: core: Handle Babble condition only in HOST mode
Hi George,
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:32 PM, George Cherian wrote:
> Hi Bin,
>
> On 5/19/2014 9:24 PM, Bin Liu wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:39 AM, George Cherian
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> BABBLE and RESET share the same interrupt. The interrupt
>>> is considered to be RESET if MUSB is in peripheral mode and
>>> as a BABBLE if MUSB is in HOST mode.
>>>
>>> Handle babble condition iff MUSB is in HOST mode.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: George Cherian
>>> ---
>>> drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
>>> index 61da471..eff3c5c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
>>> @@ -849,7 +849,7 @@ b_host:
>>> }
>>>
>>> /* handle babble condition */
>>> - if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE)
>>> + if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE && is_host_active(musb))
>>> schedule_work(&musb->recover_work);
>>
>> I guess my following comments are for Daniel's patch as while which
>> initially added the babble work.
>>
>> Should this if statement be merged into the previous 'if(int_usb &
>> MUSB_INTR_RESET)' one, which handles the same interrupt and already
>> handles host and device mode respectively.
>
>
> Initially I too had the babble handling as part of 'if(int_usb &
> MUSB_INTR_RESET)'
> one. But during my tests I hit a corner case where in we hit a BABBLE
> condition
> on disconnect. In such case the babble interrupt can be handled only if we
> have a seperate
> check, else its considered as a BUS RESET.
>
> When all devices are disconnected MUSB_DEVCTL_HM = 0 and the code always
> enter the
> else path. In this path it treats the BABBLE as a BUS RESET.
The code flow is a bit confusing, two if() handle the same interrupt.
The second one implied using 'handled = IRQ_HANDLED;' from the first
one.
Also does the switch() in else{} in the first if() cause any side effect?
Since this babble handing is AM335x specific, how about handle it in
dsps_interrupt() in musb_dsps.c, which already has an entry for babble
interrupt? TI 3.2 kernel does this way.
Regards,
-Bin.
>
>
>> Regards,
>> -Bin.
>>
>>> #if 0
>>> --
>>> 1.8.3.1
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>
>
>
> --
> -George
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] usb: musb: core: Handle Babble condition only in HOST mode
Hi Bin, On 5/19/2014 9:24 PM, Bin Liu wrote: Hi, On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:39 AM, George Cherian wrote: BABBLE and RESET share the same interrupt. The interrupt is considered to be RESET if MUSB is in peripheral mode and as a BABBLE if MUSB is in HOST mode. Handle babble condition iff MUSB is in HOST mode. Signed-off-by: George Cherian --- drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c index 61da471..eff3c5c 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c @@ -849,7 +849,7 @@ b_host: } /* handle babble condition */ - if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE) + if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE && is_host_active(musb)) schedule_work(&musb->recover_work); I guess my following comments are for Daniel's patch as while which initially added the babble work. Should this if statement be merged into the previous 'if(int_usb & MUSB_INTR_RESET)' one, which handles the same interrupt and already handles host and device mode respectively. Initially I too had the babble handling as part of 'if(int_usb & MUSB_INTR_RESET)' one. But during my tests I hit a corner case where in we hit a BABBLE condition on disconnect. In such case the babble interrupt can be handled only if we have a seperate check, else its considered as a BUS RESET. When all devices are disconnected MUSB_DEVCTL_HM = 0 and the code always enter the else path. In this path it treats the BABBLE as a BUS RESET. Regards, -Bin. #if 0 -- 1.8.3.1 -- 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 -- -George -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] usb: musb: core: Handle Babble condition only in HOST mode
Hi, On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:39 AM, George Cherian wrote: > BABBLE and RESET share the same interrupt. The interrupt > is considered to be RESET if MUSB is in peripheral mode and > as a BABBLE if MUSB is in HOST mode. > > Handle babble condition iff MUSB is in HOST mode. > > Signed-off-by: George Cherian > --- > drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c > index 61da471..eff3c5c 100644 > --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c > +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c > @@ -849,7 +849,7 @@ b_host: > } > > /* handle babble condition */ > - if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE) > + if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE && is_host_active(musb)) > schedule_work(&musb->recover_work); I guess my following comments are for Daniel's patch as while which initially added the babble work. Should this if statement be merged into the previous 'if(int_usb & MUSB_INTR_RESET)' one, which handles the same interrupt and already handles host and device mode respectively. Regards, -Bin. > > #if 0 > -- > 1.8.3.1 > > -- > 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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCH v4 1/6] usb: musb: core: Handle Babble condition only in HOST mode
BABBLE and RESET share the same interrupt. The interrupt is considered to be RESET if MUSB is in peripheral mode and as a BABBLE if MUSB is in HOST mode. Handle babble condition iff MUSB is in HOST mode. Signed-off-by: George Cherian --- drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c index 61da471..eff3c5c 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c @@ -849,7 +849,7 @@ b_host: } /* handle babble condition */ - if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE) + if (int_usb & MUSB_INTR_BABBLE && is_host_active(musb)) schedule_work(&musb->recover_work); #if 0 -- 1.8.3.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
