On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:32:42PM -0500, Bin Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:19:40AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Bin Liu <b-liu@xxxxxx> [160912 09:55]:
> > > Hi Tony,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 08:39:49AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > Commit a83e17d0f73b ("usb: musb: Improve PM runtime and phy handling
> > > > for 2430 glue layer") moved PHY enable/disable calls to happen from
> > > > omap2430_musb_enable/disable(). That broke enumeration for several
> > > > devices as PM runtime in the PHY will never enable it.
> > > >
> > > > The root cause of the problem is unpaired calls from musb_core.c to
> > > > musb_platform_enable/disable in musb_core.c as reported by
> > > > Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>.
> > > >
> > > > As musb_platform_enable/disable are being called from various functions,
> > > > let's not attempt to make them paiered immediately. This would require
> > > > fixing all the callers like musb_remove.
> > > >
> > > > Instead, let's first fix the regression in a minimal way by removing
> > > > the initial call to musb_platform_disable.
> > > >
> > > > AFAIK the initial musb_platform_disable call has always been just an
> > > > attempted workaround for the 2430 glue layer announcing itself too
> > > > early before the gadgets are configured. And that issue finally
> > >
> > > Many glue layers rely on musb_platform_diable to disable interrupts in
> > > musb_init_controller() before registering ISR, is it safe to assume the
> > > interrupts will be masked when musb is out-of-reset so that we don't
> > > have to call musb_platform_disable() in musb_init_controller()?
> >
> > It should be, we do request_irq only later on after this in musb_core.c.
> > And the glue layers don't do request_irq except for the separate DMA
> > interrupts in two cases.
>
> Yeah, the glue layer does not do request_irq, core does it after called
> musb_platform_disable(), in which some glues mask interrupts.
>
> If musb_init_controller() no longer calls musb_platform_disable(), it
> kinda worries me. I have asked around, no one says that it is a safe
> assumption that interrupt will be masked when out-of-reset, though it is
> common sense.
>
> This change should not break any glue layer which relies on
> musb_platform_disable() to disable interrupts.
>
> So Kishon, if you take this patch in your tree, here is my
>
> Signed-off-by: Bin Liu <b-liu@xxxxxx>
Ahh, should be
Acked-by: Bin Liu <b-liu@xxxxxx>
>
> Regards,
> -Bin.
>
> >
> > And as the platform glue layer are the ones doing the probing, they
> > should initialize things into sane state :)
> >
> > We could add a call irq_set_status_flags(irq, IRQ_NOAUTOEN) before
> > request_irq. But I'm guessing there's no need to.. Do you have some
> > example in mind that should be tested?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Tony
--
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
