On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 12:23:54PM +0900, Jung Daehwan wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 11:19:25AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:06:17PM +0900, Jung Daehwan wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:19:17PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 06:18:45PM +0900, Daehwan Jung wrote:
> > > > > To enable supporting for USB offload, define "offload" in usb controller
> > > > > node of device tree. "offload" value can be used to determine which type
> > > > > of offload was been enabled in the SoC.
> > > > >
> > > > > For example:
> > > > >
> > > > > &usbdrd_dwc3 {
> > > > > ...
> > > > > /* support usb offloading, 0: disabled, 1: audio */
> > > > > offload = <1>;
> > > > > ...
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > There are several vendor_ops introduced by this patch:
> > > > >
> > > > > struct xhci_vendor_ops - function callbacks for vendor specific operations
> > > > > {
> > > > > @vendor_init:
> > > > > - called for vendor init process during xhci-plat-hcd
> > > > > probe.
> > > > > @vendor_cleanup:
> > > > > - called for vendor cleanup process during xhci-plat-hcd
> > > > > remove.
> > > > > @is_usb_offload_enabled:
> > > > > - called to check if usb offload enabled.
> > > > > @alloc_dcbaa:
> > > > > - called when allocating vendor specific dcbaa during
> > > > > memory initializtion.
> > > > > @free_dcbaa:
> > > > > - called to free vendor specific dcbaa when cleanup the
> > > > > memory.
> > > > > @alloc_transfer_ring:
> > > > > - called when vendor specific transfer ring allocation is required
> > > > > @free_transfer_ring:
> > > > > - called to free vendor specific transfer ring
> > > > > @sync_dev_ctx:
> > > > > - called when synchronization for device context is required
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > The xhci hooks with prefix "xhci_vendor_" on the ops in xhci_vendor_ops.
> > > > > For example, vendor_init ops will be invoked by xhci_vendor_init() hook,
> > > > > is_usb_offload_enabled ops will be invoked by
> > > > > xhci_vendor_is_usb_offload_enabled(), and so on.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Daehwan Jung <dh10.jung@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: J. Avila <elavila@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Puma Hsu <pumahsu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Howard Yen <howardyen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-hub.c | 5 ++
> > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c | 131 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c | 44 +++++++++++-
> > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.h | 8 +++
> > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci.h | 46 ++++++++++++
> > > > > 6 files changed, 296 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > Why do you need to "override" anything? Why can't these just be added
> > > > to the current xhci_plat_priv structure and used that way like the
> > > > current xhci platform interface works?
> > > >
> > >
> > > "override" means above xhci hooks? Above hooks are for ring management.
> > > In fact, xhci platform doesn't care ring management. That's why I've added hooks
> > > not used xhci_plat_priv.
> >
> > Why not add ring management ability to the platform interface instead?
> > That's what you want to control here, in your platform driver, right?
> >
>
> I think xhci platform driver is separated from ring management. I don't
> want to disturb current design.
You are adding platform-specific changes to the driver, that seems like
it would belong in the platform interface instead of requiring another
api/interface to be created within the same driver, right?
Anyway, just trying to make it simpler overall.
thanks,
greg k-h
