On 10/09/15 08:35, Peter Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 01:21:50PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> On 09/09/15 11:45, Peter Chen wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 12:33:20PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>>> On 09/09/15 11:13, Peter Chen wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 12:08:10PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>>>>> On 09/09/15 05:21, Peter Chen wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 03:25:25PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 08/09/15 11:31, Peter Chen wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 01:23:01PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 07/09/15 04:23, Peter Chen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 04:21:18PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> + * This is used by the USB Host stack to register the Host controller
>>>>>>>>>>>> + * to the OTG core. Host controller must not be started by the
>>>>>>>>>>>> + * caller as it is left upto the OTG state machine to do so.
>>>>>>>>>>>> + *
>>>>>>>>>>>> + * Returns: 0 on success, error value otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>>>>>> +int usb_otg_register_hcd(struct usb_hcd *hcd, unsigned int irqnum,
>>>>>>>>>>>> + unsigned long irqflags, struct otg_hcd_ops *ops)
>>>>>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>>>>>> + struct usb_otg *otgd;
>>>>>>>>>>>> + struct device *hcd_dev = hcd->self.controller;
>>>>>>>>>>>> + struct device *otg_dev = usb_otg_get_device(hcd_dev);
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> One big problem here is: there are two designs for current (IP) driver
>>>>>>>>>>> code, one creates dedicated hcd device as roothub's parent, like dwc3.
>>>>>>>>>>> Another one doesn't do this, roothub's parent is core device (or otg device
>>>>>>>>>>> in your patch), like chipidea and dwc2.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Then, otg_dev will be glue layer device for chipidea after that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OK. Let's add a way for the otg controller driver to provide the host and gadget
>>>>>>>>>> information to the otg core for such devices like chipidea and dwc2.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Roger, not only chipidea and dwc2, I think the musb uses the same
>>>>>>>>> hierarchy. If the host, device, and otg share the same register
>>>>>>>>> region, host part can't be a platform driver since we don't want
>>>>>>>>> to remap the same register region again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, in the design, we may need to consider both situations, one
>>>>>>>>> is otg/host/device has its own register region, and host is a
>>>>>>>>> separate platform device (A), the other is three parts share the
>>>>>>>>> same register region, there is only one platform driver (B).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IP core device
>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>> |-----|-----|
>>>>>>>>> gadget host platform device
>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>> roothub
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> B:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IP core device
>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>> |-----|-----|
>>>>>>>>> gadget roothub
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This API must be called before the hcd/gadget-driver is added so that the otg
>>>>>>>>>> core knows it's linked to an OTG controller.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any better idea?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A flag stands for this hcd controller is the same with otg controller
>>>>>>>>> can be used, this flag can be stored at struct usb_otg_config.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What if there is another architecture like so?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> C:
>>>>>>>> [Parent]
>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>> |------------------|--------------|
>>>>>>>> [OTG core] [gadget] [host]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We need a more flexible mechanism to link the gadget and
>>>>>>>> host device to the otg core for non DT case.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about adding struct usb_otg parameter to usb_otg_register_hcd()?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> e.g.
>>>>>>>> int usb_otg_register_hcd(struct usb_otg *otg, struct usb_hcd *hcd, ..)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If otg is NULL it will try DT otg-controller property or parent to
>>>>>>>> get the otg controller.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How usb_otg_register_hcd get struct usb_otg, from where?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This only works when the parent driver creating the hcd has registered the
>>>>>> otg controller too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry? So we need to find another way to solve this issue, right?
>>>>
>>>> For existing cases this is sufficient.
>>>> The otg device is either the one supplied during usb_otg_register_hcd
>>>> (cases B and C) or it is the parent device (case A).
>>>
>>> How we differentiate case A and case B at usb_otg_register_hcd?
>>> Would you show me the sample code?
>>
>> Case A:
>>
>> hcd platform driver doesn't know about otg device so it calls
>>
>> usb_add_hcd(hcd,..)->usb_otg_register_hcd(NULL, hcd,..);
>>
>> Case B:
>>
>> core driver knows about both otg and hcd so it calls
>> usb_otg_register_hcd(otg, hcd,...);
>>
>
> Ok, Get your points, you mean invoke usb_otg_register_hcd at platform
> driver directly instead of at hcd.c. It may be not a good solution
> due to we use different otg APIs for two cases, it may confuse the
> users, unless we can have some APIs (flags) are easy to read and well
> documentation.
>
I need to think how else we can solve this problem so that it is usable
for all scenarios. If you get some bright ideas please do share :)
cheers,
-roger
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
