Jun Li <lijun.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> 于2020年5月7日周四 上午11:08写道： > > John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2020年5月7日周四 上午6:27写道： > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 2:00 AM Jun Li <lijun.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2019年10月30日周三 上午5:18写道： > > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 2:11 AM Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > > From: Yu Chen <chenyu56@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > It needs more time for the device controller to clear the CmdAct of > > > > > > DEPCMD on Hisilicon Kirin Soc. > > > > > > > > > > Why does it need more time? Why is it so that no other platform needs > > > > > more time, only this one? And which command, specifically, causes > > > > > problem? > > > > > > Sorry for my back to this so late. > > > > > > This change is required on my dwc3 based HW too, I gave a check > > > and the reason is suspend_clk is used in case the PIPE phy is at P3, > > > this slow clock makes my EP command below timeout. > > > > > > dwc3_gadget_ep_cmd: ep0out: cmd 'Set Endpoint Configuration' [401] > > > params 00001000 00000500 00000000 --> status: Timed Out > > > > > > Success case takes about 400us to complete, see below trace(44.286278 > > > - 44.285897 = 0.000381): > > > > > > configfs_acm.sh-822 [000] d..1 44.285896: dwc3_writel: addr > > > 000000006d59aae1 value 00000401 > > > configfs_acm.sh-822 [000] d..1 44.285897: dwc3_readl: addr > > > 000000006d59aae1 value 00000401 > > > ... ... > > > configfs_acm.sh-822 [000] d..1 44.286278: dwc3_readl: addr > > > 000000006d59aae1 value 00000001 > > > configfs_acm.sh-822 [000] d..1 44.286279: dwc3_gadget_ep_cmd: > > > ep0out: cmd 'Set Endpoint Configuration' [401] params 00001000 > > > 00000500 00000000 --> status: Successful > > > > > > Hi John, > > > > > > Do you still have this problem? if yes, What's the value of > > > USBLNKST[21:18] when the timeout happens? > > > > Sorry. As I mentioned, I was working to upstream a patchset that I > > hadn't created, so the context I had was limited. As I couldn't > > reproduce an issue without the change on the device I had, I figured > > it would be best to drop it. > > That was fine. > > > > However, as you have some analysis and rational for why such a change > > would be needed, I don't have an objection to it. Do you want to > > resubmit the patch with your explanation and detailed log above in the > > commit message? > > Sure, I will resubmit the patch with my explanation added in commit message. Hi John A second think of this, I feel use readl_poll_timeout_atomic() to wait by time is more proper here, so I create a new patch to address this also other registers polling, see below patch with you CCed: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11536081/ thanks Li Jun > > thanks > Li Jun > > > > thanks > > -john
