From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, USB <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] usb: dwc3: Wait for control tranfer completed when stopping gadget
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 12:58:31 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87eg4g43eg.fsf@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMz4ku+TwPrnE+CuyL7MtcStcU=DLP9an4PVp1J=hjy3fOkOTQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1867 bytes --]
Hi,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org> writes:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>>> index 1a33308..c9026ce 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>>> @@ -1441,6 +1441,15 @@ static int dwc3_gadget_run_stop(struct dwc3 *dwc, int is_on, int suspend)
>>> if (pm_runtime_suspended(dwc->dev))
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> + /*
>>> + * Per databook, when we want to stop the gadget, if a control transfer
>>> + * is still in process, complete it and get the core into setup phase.
>>> + */
>>> + if (!is_on && dwc->ep0state != EP0_SETUP_PHASE) {
>>> + reinit_completion(&dwc->ep0_completed);
>>
>> this seems unnecessary to me. Also, why return here so the caller has to
>
> We should re-init the completion due to it will complete control
> transfer many times before we try to stop gadget.
not sure I get this comment, care to furter explain what you mean?
>> wait? You could just have called wait_for_completion() here straight
>> away:
>>
>> if (!is_on && dwc->ep0state != EP0_SETUP_PHASE) {
>> /* should this be interruptible? */
>> ret = wait_for_completion_timeout(&dwc->ep0_in_setup,
>> msecs_to_jiffies(500));
>> if (ret == 0) {
>> dwc3_trace(trace_dwc3_gadget, "RUN/STOP timeout");
>> return -ETIMEDOUT;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> There's also no need for that "try_again" trickery. We either can halt
>> the controller within 500ms or we cannot.
>
> But this is in atomic context and we can not issue
> wait_for_completion_timeout() in atomic context, then we should just
> return here.
heh, good point. Missed that :-)
--
balbi
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 800 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-19 9:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-09 7:16 [PATCH v2 1/2] usb: dwc3: gadget: Add disconnect checking when changing function dynamically Baolin Wang
2016-09-09 7:16 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] usb: dwc3: Wait for control tranfer completed when stopping gadget Baolin Wang
2016-09-09 11:03 ` Felipe Balbi
2016-09-18 4:58 ` Baolin Wang
2016-09-19 9:58 ` Felipe Balbi [this message]
2016-09-19 10:42 ` Baolin Wang
2016-09-09 10:47 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] usb: dwc3: gadget: Add disconnect checking when changing function dynamically Felipe Balbi
2016-09-18 4:48 ` Baolin Wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87eg4g43eg.fsf@linux.intel.com \
--to=balbi@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linaro.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome