Re: [RFC 2/8] usb: dwc3: core: Register vendor hooks for dwc3-qcom

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 






Hi Bryan,

What happens to this code if you

static int count;

1. sleep in dwc3_probe for 10 milliseconds
2. return -EPROBE_DEFER
3. if count++ < 5 goto 1

i.e. if we simulate say waiting on a PHY driver to probe in dwc3_probe()

The vendor hooks are used in __dwc3_set_mode and role_switch_set calls in core and drd files respectively. These are invoked only if we are OTG capable. The drd_work is initialized in core_init_mode which is called at the end of dwc3_probe. If dwc3_probe fails and gets deferred before that, none of the vendor hooks will be fired and dwc3_qcom_probe is also deferred.

However I see that if core_init_mode fails (the cleanup is already done in drd to prevent set_role from getting invoked already),  I need to cleanup vendor hooks in error path of dwc3_probe().

and what happens if we introduce a 100 millsecond sleep into dwc3_qcom_probe() - and run a fake disconnect event from dwc3_qcom_probe_core() directly ?

In other words if make it that dwc3_probe() completes and struct dwc3_glue_ops->notify_cable_disconnect() fires prior to dwc3_qcom_probe_core() completing ?

i.e. I don't immediately see how you've solved the probe() completion race condition here.

Just wanted to understand the situation clearly. Is this the sequence you are referring to ?

1. dwc3_probe is successful and role switch is registered properly.
2. added delay after dwc3_qcom_probe_core and before interconnect_init
3. Between this delay, we got a disconnect notificiation from glink
4. We are clearing the qscratch reg in case of device mode and un-registering notifier in case of host mode.

If so, firstly I don't see any issue if we process disconnect event before qcom probe is complete. If we reached this stage, the clocks/gdsc is definitely ON and register accesses are good to go.

If we are in host mode at this point, we would just unregister to usb-core notifier and mark last busy. If we are in device mode, we would just clear the hs_phy_ctrl reg of qscratch. After the 100ms delay you mentioned we would call dwc3_remove anyways and cleanup the vendor hooks. But is the concern here that, what if we enter runtime_suspend at this point ?


Just to clarify one more thing. The probe completion requirement came in because, before the device tree was flattened, dwc3-qcom and core are two different platform devices. And if the dwc3 core device probe got deferred, dwc3-qcom probe still gets successfully completed. The glue would never know when to register vendor hook callbacks to dwc3-core as it would never know when the core probe was completed.

That is the reason we wanted to find out accurate point where core probe is done to ensure we can properly register these callbacks.

Are you saying to you require/rely on both of these series being applied first ?

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/af60c05b-4a0f-51b8-486a-1fc601602515@xxxxxxxxxxx/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231016-dwc3-refactor-v1-0-ab4a84165470@xxxxxxxxxxx/

Must be, nothing applies for me in this series.

The first one is not a patch. It is just a discussion thread I started to get community's opinion before on disconnect interrupt handling. The current series is based on top of [2] made by Bjorn (as you already found out) and as I mentioned in cover letter of my series.

Regards,
Krishna,



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux