Hi,
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 11:34:26AM -0600, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 09:18 -0600, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 09:25:13PM -0600, dinguyen@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > From: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > The dwc2 IP on the SOCFPGA cannot use the default HW configured
> > > FIFO sizes. The total FIFO depth as read from GHWCFG3 reports 0x1f80 or 8064
> > > 32-bit words. But the GRXFSIZ, GNPTXFSIZ, and HPTXFSIZ register defaults
> > > to 0x2000 or 8192 32-bit words. So the driver cannot just use the fifo sizes
> > > as read from those registers.
> > >
> > > For platforms that face the same issue, this commits sets the RX, periodic TX,
> > > and non-periodic TX fifo size to those that are recommended v2.93a spec for
> > > the DWC2 IP.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Acked-by: Paul Zimmerman <paulz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > v2: Fix coding style with braces around both if() branches
> > > ---
> > > drivers/usb/dwc2/core.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc2/core.c b/drivers/usb/dwc2/core.c
> > > index 1d12988..efa7a45 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/usb/dwc2/core.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc2/core.c
> > > @@ -507,6 +507,44 @@ void dwc2_disable_host_interrupts(struct dwc2_hsotg *hsotg)
> > > writel(intmsk, hsotg->regs + GINTMSK);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +/*
> > > + * dwc2_calculate_dynamic_fifo() - Calculates the default fifo size
> > > + * For system that have a total fifo depth that is smaller than the default
> > > + * RX + TX fifo size.
> > > + *
> > > + * @hsotg: Programming view of DWC_otg controller
> > > + */
> > > +static void dwc2_calculate_dynamic_fifo(struct dwc2_hsotg *hsotg)
> > > +{
> > > + struct dwc2_core_params *params = hsotg->core_params;
> > > + struct dwc2_hw_params *hw = &hsotg->hw_params;
> > > + u32 rxfsiz, nptxfsiz, ptxfsiz, total_fifo_size;
> > > +
> > > + total_fifo_size = hw->total_fifo_size;
> > > + rxfsiz = params->host_rx_fifo_size;
> > > + nptxfsiz = params->host_nperio_tx_fifo_size;
> > > + ptxfsiz = params->host_perio_tx_fifo_size;
> > > +
> > > + if (total_fifo_size >= (rxfsiz + nptxfsiz + ptxfsiz)) {
> > > + /* Params are valid, nothing to do */
> > > + return;
> > > + } else {
> > > + /* min rx fifo size = ((largest packet/4)*2)+2 */
> > > + rxfsiz = (512/4) * 2 + 2;
> > > + /* min non-periodic tx fifo depth */
> > > + nptxfsiz = 2 * (512/4);
> > > + /* min periodic tx fifo depth */
> > > + ptxfsiz = (512 * 3)/4;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (total_fifo_size < (rxfsiz + nptxfsiz + ptxfsiz))
> > > + dev_err(hsotg->dev, "invalid fifo sizes\n");
> >
> > my comments were silently ignored. NAK.
>
> I did not mean to ignore your comments, except I did not see any for
> this patch.
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.usb.general/104157
>
> Except for the checkpatch --strict part. Which I reran with v1 of the
> patch and it still was clean.
here: http://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=139390107203151&w=2
The difference is that you renamed the patch, but it's still the same
code.
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
