On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 02:37:34AM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I ran into the following piece of code at
> drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c:1854 (linux-next)
>
> 1854/*
> 1855 * Check the musb devctl session bit to determine if we want to
> 1856 * allow PM runtime for the device. In general, we want to keep things
> 1857 * active when the session bit is set except after host disconnect.
> 1858 *
> 1859 * Only called from musb_irq_work. If this ever needs to get called
> 1860 * elsewhere, proper locking must be implemented for musb->session.
> 1861 */
> 1862static void musb_pm_runtime_check_session(struct musb *musb)
> 1863{
> 1864 u8 devctl, s;
> 1865 int error;
> 1866
> 1867 devctl = musb_readb(musb->mregs, MUSB_DEVCTL);
> 1868
> 1869 /* Handle session status quirks first */
> 1870 s = MUSB_DEVCTL_FSDEV | MUSB_DEVCTL_LSDEV |
> 1871 MUSB_DEVCTL_HR;
> 1872 switch (devctl & ~s) {
> 1873 case MUSB_QUIRK_B_INVALID_VBUS_91:
> 1874 if (musb->quirk_retries--) {
> 1875 musb_dbg(musb,
> 1876 "Poll devctl on invalid vbus,
> assume no session");
> 1877 schedule_delayed_work(&musb->irq_work,
> 1878 msecs_to_jiffies(1000));
> 1879
> 1880 return;
> 1881 }
> 1882 case MUSB_QUIRK_A_DISCONNECT_19:
> 1883 if (musb->quirk_retries--) {
> 1884 musb_dbg(musb,
> 1885 "Poll devctl on possible host
> mode disconnect");
> 1886 schedule_delayed_work(&musb->irq_work,
> 1887 msecs_to_jiffies(1000));
> 1888
> 1889 return;
> 1890 }
> 1891 if (!musb->session)
> 1892 break;
> 1893 musb_dbg(musb, "Allow PM on possible host mode
> disconnect");
> 1894 pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(musb->controller);
> 1895 pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(musb->controller);
> 1896 musb->session = false;
> 1897 return;
> 1898 default:
> 1899 break;
> 1900 }
> 1901
> 1902 /* No need to do anything if session has not changed */
> 1903 s = devctl & MUSB_DEVCTL_SESSION;
> 1904 if (s == musb->session)
> 1905 return;
> 1906
> 1907 /* Block PM or allow PM? */
> 1908 if (s) {
> 1909 musb_dbg(musb, "Block PM on active session:
> %02x", devctl);
> 1910 error = pm_runtime_get_sync(musb->controller);
> 1911 if (error < 0)
> 1912 dev_err(musb->controller, "Could not
> enable: %i\n",
> 1913 error);
> 1914 musb->quirk_retries = 3;
> 1915 } else {
> 1916 musb_dbg(musb, "Allow PM with no session: %02x", devctl);
> 1917 pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(musb->controller);
> 1918 pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(musb->controller);
> 1919 }
> 1920
> 1921 musb->session = s;
> 1922}
>
> The thing is that the case for MUSB_QUIRK_B_INVALID_VBUS_91 is not
> terminated by a break statement, and it falls through to the next
> case MUSB_QUIRK_A_DISCONNECT_19, in case "if
> (musb->quirk_retries--)" turns to be false.
>
> My question here is if this code is intentional?
Yes, it is. For both MUSB_QUIRK_B_INVALID_VBUS_91 and
MUSB_QUIRK_A_DISCONNECT_19 cases, we first do retries, then if
musb->session is set, we allow PM.
Regards,
-Bin.
--
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
