Wesley Cheng wrote:
>
>
> On 9/10/2021 8:08 PM, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
>> Wesley Cheng wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/9/2021 6:15 PM, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
>>>> Jack Pham wrote:
>>>>> Some functions may dynamically enable and disable their endpoints
>>>>> regularly throughout their operation, particularly when Set Interface
>>>>> is employed to switch between Alternate Settings. For instance the
>>>>> UAC2 function has its respective endpoints for playback & capture
>>>>> associated with AltSetting 1, in which case those endpoints would not
>>>>> get enabled until the host activates the AltSetting. And they
>>>>> conversely become disabled when the interfaces' AltSetting 0 is
>>>>> chosen.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the DWC3 FIFO resizing algorithm recently added, every
>>>>> usb_ep_enable() call results in a call to resize that EP's TXFIFO,
>>>>> but if the same endpoint is enabled again and again, this incorrectly
>>>>> leads to FIFO RAM allocation exhaustion as the mechanism did not
>>>>> account for the possibility that endpoints can be re-enabled many
>>>>> times.
>>>>>
>>>>> Example log splat:
>>>>>
>>>>> dwc3 a600000.dwc3: Fifosize(3717) > RAM size(3462) ep3in depth:217973127
>>>>> configfs-gadget gadget: u_audio_start_capture:521 Error!
>>>>> dwc3 a600000.dwc3: request 000000000be13e18 was not queued to ep3in
>>>>>
>>>>> This is easily fixed by bailing out of dwc3_gadget_resize_tx_fifos()
>>>>> if an endpoint is already resized, avoiding the calculation error
>>>>> resulting from accumulating the EP's FIFO depth repeatedly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 9f607a309fbe9 ("usb: dwc3: Resize TX FIFOs to meet EP bursting requirements")
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jack Pham <jackp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c | 4 ++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>>>>> index 804b50548163..c647c76d7361 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>>>>> @@ -747,6 +747,10 @@ static int dwc3_gadget_resize_tx_fifos(struct dwc3_ep *dep)
>>>>> if (!usb_endpoint_dir_in(dep->endpoint.desc) || dep->number <= 1)
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> + /* bail if already resized */
>>>>> + if (dwc3_readl(dwc->regs, DWC3_GTXFIFOSIZ(dep->number >> 1)))
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> ram1_depth = DWC3_RAM1_DEPTH(dwc->hwparams.hwparams7);
>>>>>
>>>>> if ((dep->endpoint.maxburst > 1 &&
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Thinh,
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This seems like a workaround more than a fix. As previously pointed out,
>>>> there will be problems when there are multiple alternate setting
>>>> interface [2]. If we're doing this way, are we properly allocating the
>>>> fifo size for the alternate setting that requires the most fifo size and
>>>> not just the first alt-setting 0? Also different alt-setting can have
>>>
>>> Each alt interface will call usb_ep_autoconfig() which should be
>>> assigned different endpoint numbers. This would mean that if alt intf#0
>>> gets selected, and EP is enabled, then we will resize the TXFIFO and map
>>> that FIFO to the physical EP. Then when/if the host requests the other
>>> alt intf#1, and that calls EP enable, then the logic will then attempt
>>> to resize based on the parameters, and again map that FIFO to the
>>> physical EP. (since we call autoconfig on all interfaces, they should be
>>> assigned different endpoints)
>
> Hi Thinh,
>
>>
>> That's not true. Different alt-settings of an interface can share
>> endpoint numbers. This is often the case for UASP driver where
>> alt-setting 0 is for BOT protocol and alt-setting 1 is UASP. When we
>> switch alt-setting, we disable the current endpoints and enable the
>> old/new ones.
>>
>
> Thanks for pointing that use case out. Maybe we can consider seeing if
> we can walk through all alternate interfaces for a particular function,
> and resize for the largest setting? That might be a possible
> improvement made to the check_config() function. Let me start makign
> the changes for this and verifying it.
>
Thanks!
Currently the gadget configures early and informs the gadget driver of
how many endpoints are available, which doesn't leave much room for the
gadget to do optimization/reconfiguration.
If there's an option for the composite layer to inform the controller
driver of the entire configuration, then we can take advantage of more
dwc3 controller capability/flexibility (not just resizing txfifo).
>>>
>>> I agree that there is currently a limitation because we are going to
>>> reserve at minimum 1 FIFO for BOTH alt interfaces, even though there is
>>> only 1 interface active at a time. The missing logic that we might be
>>> missing is seeing how we can re-purpose the FIFO that is being disabled.
>>> However, I think Jack's fix here would be applicable to the improvement
>>> in logic to re-use/re-assign FIFO space allocated by disabled EPs also.
>>>
>>
>> Improvement is always great. I just hope we don't just stop where we are
>> now. Since you're working on this feature at the moment, it would be
>> good to also resolve some of the outstanding issues as Jack's fix seems
>> to be incomplete.
>>
>
> If we implement the improvement mentioned above, I think Jack's fix will
> be applicable there as well. If we resize for the largest alternate
> interface, then there would be no reason for us to resize again.
>
As long as you have the above as part of your roadmap, I don't mind
Jack's fix for now. Depends on your implementation, Jack's fix may not
be applicable. Regardless, ultimately it's up to Felipe. :)
>>>> different endpoints, the logic handling this may not be simple.
>>>>
>>>> There are a few review comments for Wesley. Hopefully they get resolved
>>>> eventually.
>>>
>>> As mentioned above, there is a lot of considerations we need to make
>>> when looking at the amount of combinations that can be done for a USB
>>> configuration. We obviously want to see if we can find a way to
>>> re-allocate FIFO space, but it gets complicated if we run into a
>>> "fragmented" situation where the RAM associated to the EP being
>>> re-allocated is in between 2 that are active.
>>>
>>
>> I'd like to have this feature added, and it would be great if it can
>> overcome some of the current limitations. At the moment, if this feature
>> is enabled, it may improve some applications, but it may also cause
>> regression for some. As I noted, the fix may not be simple, but I hope
>> this feature can work for various applications and not just a limited few.
>>
>
> Agreed, there are some use cases that we may not consider in our
> platform, so I appreciate the input.
>
(Sorry for the delay response. I was on vacation.)
BR,
Thinh
