Hi Felipe,
On 11/7/2018 11:03 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thinh Nguyen <thinh.nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> Similar to URB's start_frame, add a field start_frame to the usb_request
>> to report the scheduled (micro)frame number of an isochronous transfer.
>> This option is useful for debugging purposes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thinh Nguyen <thinhn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/linux/usb/gadget.h | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/usb/gadget.h b/include/linux/usb/gadget.h
>> index e5cd84a0f84a..ed9dbbce55ee 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/usb/gadget.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/usb/gadget.h
>> @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ struct usb_ep;
>> * @short_not_ok: When reading data, makes short packets be
>> * treated as errors (queue stops advancing till cleanup).
>> * @dma_mapped: Indicates if request has been mapped to DMA (internal)
>> + * @start_frame: the reported (micro)frame of the scheduled isoc transfer
>> * @complete: Function called when request completes, so this request and
>> * its buffer may be re-used. The function will always be called with
>> * interrupts disabled, and it must not sleep.
>> @@ -107,6 +108,8 @@ struct usb_request {
>> unsigned short_not_ok:1;
>> unsigned dma_mapped:1;
>>
>> + int start_frame; /* ISO ONLY */
> this name is a bit misleading. I can see functions trying to use it to
> request that a particular request start on a specific frame. Would
> "started_frame" be a better name, perhaps?
What do you think of changing this field name to "frame_number"? It's
generic enough so that this field can potentially be updated in the
future to be used as a starting frame in the future, for synchronization.
Thinh
