| Message ID | 1400506776-2816-2-git-send-email-george.cherian@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi, On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:39 AM, George Cherian <george.cherian@ti.com> 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 <george.cherian@ti.com> > --- > 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 majordomo@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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Bin, On 5/19/2014 9:24 PM, Bin Liu wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:39 AM, George Cherian <george.cherian@ti.com> 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 <george.cherian@ti.com> >> --- >> 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi George, On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:32 PM, George Cherian <george.cherian@ti.com> 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 <george.cherian@ti.com> >> 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 <george.cherian@ti.com> >>> --- >>> 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 majordomo@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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 5/23/2014 2:12 AM, Bin Liu wrote: > Hi George, > > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:32 PM, George Cherian <george.cherian@ti.com> 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 <george.cherian@ti.com> >>> 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 <george.cherian@ti.com> >>>> --- >>>> 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org >>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> >> >> -- >> -George >>
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
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 <george.cherian@ti.com> --- drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)