On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 5:39 AM Jos Wang <joswang1221@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Thank you for your help in reviewing the code. > > USB PD3 CTS specification： > https://usb.org/document-library/usb-power-delivery-compliance-test-specification-0 > Should this link be added to the commit message? > > I will resubmit the code as soon as possible and put patch 1/2 and 2/2 > in the same thread. > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 6:03 PM Heikki Krogerus > <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 08:50:13PM +0800, joswang wrote: > > > From: Jos Wang <joswang@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > According to the USB PD3 CTS specification, the requirements > > > > What is "USB PD3 CTS specification"? Please open it here. > > > > > for tSenderResponse are different in PD2 and PD3 modes, see > > > Table 19 Timing Table & Calculations. For PD2 mode, the > > > tSenderResponse min 24ms and max 30ms; for PD3 mode, the > > > tSenderResponse min 27ms and max 33ms. > > > > > > For the "TEST.PD.PROT.SRC.2 Get_Source_Cap No Request" test > > > item, after receiving the Source_Capabilities Message sent by > > > the UUT, the tester deliberately does not send a Request Message > > > in order to force the SenderResponse timer on the Source UUT to > > > timeout. The Tester checks that a Hard Reset is detected between > > > tSenderResponse min and max，the delay is between the last bit of > > > the GoodCRC Message EOP has been sent and the first bit of Hard > > > Reset SOP has been received. The current code does not distinguish > > > between PD2 and PD3 modes, and tSenderResponse defaults to 60ms. > > > This will cause this test item and the following tests to fail: > > > TEST.PD.PROT.SRC3.2 SenderResponseTimer Timeout > > > TEST.PD.PROT.SNK.6 SenderResponseTimer Timeout > > > > > > Considering factors such as SOC performance, i2c rate, and the speed > > > of PD chip sending data, "pd2-sender-response-time-ms" and > > > "pd3-sender-response-time-ms" DT time properties are added to allow > > > users to define platform timing. For values that have not been > > > explicitly defined in DT using this property, a default value of 27ms > > > for PD2 tSenderResponse and 30ms for PD3 tSenderResponse is set. > > > > > > Fixes: f0690a25a140 ("staging: typec: USB Type-C Port Manager (tcpm)") > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Signed-off-by: Jos Wang <joswang@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > If this is a fix, then I think it's fixing commit 2eadc33f40d4 > > ("typec: tcpm: Add core support for sink side PPS"). That's where the > > pd_revision was changed to 3.0. Hmm, this patch also relies upon https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241022-pd-dt-time-props-v1-2-fea96f51b302@xxxxxxxxxx/ so not sure whether it could be Fixes: 2eadc33f40d4 ("typec: tcpm: Add core support for sink side PPS") The patch looks good otherwise. Will wait for Jos's resubmission based on his previous response. > > > > Badhri, could you take a look at this (and how about that > > maintainer role? :-) ). This took time was lining up the logistics. Will send out a patch proposing me and a few others right after the new year break. Regards, Badhri > > > > > --- > > > drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > > > include/linux/usb/pd.h | 3 ++- > > > 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c > > > index 6021eeb903fe..3a159bfcf382 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c > > > @@ -314,12 +314,16 @@ struct pd_data { > > > * @sink_wait_cap_time: Deadline (in ms) for tTypeCSinkWaitCap timer > > > * @ps_src_wait_off_time: Deadline (in ms) for tPSSourceOff timer > > > * @cc_debounce_time: Deadline (in ms) for tCCDebounce timer > > > + * @pd2_sender_response_time: Deadline (in ms) for pd20 tSenderResponse timer > > > + * @pd3_sender_response_time: Deadline (in ms) for pd30 tSenderResponse timer > > > */ > > > struct pd_timings { > > > u32 sink_wait_cap_time; > > > u32 ps_src_off_time; > > > u32 cc_debounce_time; > > > u32 snk_bc12_cmpletion_time; > > > + u32 pd2_sender_response_time; > > > + u32 pd3_sender_response_time; > > > }; > > > > > > struct tcpm_port { > > > @@ -3776,7 +3780,9 @@ static bool tcpm_send_queued_message(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > } else if (port->pwr_role == TYPEC_SOURCE) { > > > tcpm_ams_finish(port); > > > tcpm_set_state(port, HARD_RESET_SEND, > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + port->negotiated_rev >= PD_REV30 ? > > > + port->timings.pd3_sender_response_time : > > > + port->timings.pd2_sender_response_time); > > > } else { > > > tcpm_ams_finish(port); > > > } > > > @@ -4619,6 +4625,9 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > enum typec_pwr_opmode opmode; > > > unsigned int msecs; > > > enum tcpm_state upcoming_state; > > > + u32 sender_response_time = port->negotiated_rev >= PD_REV30 ? > > > + port->timings.pd3_sender_response_time : > > > + port->timings.pd2_sender_response_time; > > > > > > if (port->tcpc->check_contaminant && port->state != CHECK_CONTAMINANT) > > > port->potential_contaminant = ((port->enter_state == SRC_ATTACH_WAIT && > > > @@ -5113,7 +5122,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > tcpm_set_state(port, SNK_WAIT_CAPABILITIES, 0); > > > } else { > > > tcpm_set_state_cond(port, hard_reset_state(port), > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + sender_response_time); > > > } > > > break; > > > case SNK_NEGOTIATE_PPS_CAPABILITIES: > > > @@ -5135,7 +5144,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > tcpm_set_state(port, SNK_READY, 0); > > > } else { > > > tcpm_set_state_cond(port, hard_reset_state(port), > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + sender_response_time); > > > } > > > break; > > > case SNK_TRANSITION_SINK: > > > @@ -5387,7 +5396,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > port->message_id_prime = 0; > > > port->rx_msgid_prime = -1; > > > tcpm_pd_send_control(port, PD_CTRL_SOFT_RESET, TCPC_TX_SOP_PRIME); > > > - tcpm_set_state_cond(port, ready_state(port), PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + tcpm_set_state_cond(port, ready_state(port), sender_response_time); > > > } else { > > > port->message_id = 0; > > > port->rx_msgid = -1; > > > @@ -5398,7 +5407,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > tcpm_set_state_cond(port, hard_reset_state(port), 0); > > > else > > > tcpm_set_state_cond(port, hard_reset_state(port), > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + sender_response_time); > > > } > > > break; > > > > > > @@ -5409,8 +5418,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > port->send_discover = true; > > > port->send_discover_prime = false; > > > } > > > - tcpm_set_state_cond(port, DR_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT, > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + tcpm_set_state_cond(port, DR_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT, sender_response_time); > > > break; > > > case DR_SWAP_ACCEPT: > > > tcpm_pd_send_control(port, PD_CTRL_ACCEPT, TCPC_TX_SOP); > > > @@ -5444,7 +5452,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > tcpm_set_state(port, ERROR_RECOVERY, 0); > > > break; > > > } > > > - tcpm_set_state_cond(port, FR_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT, PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + tcpm_set_state_cond(port, FR_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT, sender_response_time); > > > break; > > > case FR_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT: > > > tcpm_set_state(port, ERROR_RECOVERY, 0); > > > @@ -5475,8 +5483,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > break; > > > case PR_SWAP_SEND: > > > tcpm_pd_send_control(port, PD_CTRL_PR_SWAP, TCPC_TX_SOP); > > > - tcpm_set_state_cond(port, PR_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT, > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + tcpm_set_state_cond(port, PR_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT, sender_response_time); > > > break; > > > case PR_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT: > > > tcpm_swap_complete(port, -ETIMEDOUT); > > > @@ -5574,8 +5581,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > break; > > > case VCONN_SWAP_SEND: > > > tcpm_pd_send_control(port, PD_CTRL_VCONN_SWAP, TCPC_TX_SOP); > > > - tcpm_set_state(port, VCONN_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT, > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + tcpm_set_state(port, VCONN_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT, sender_response_time); > > > break; > > > case VCONN_SWAP_SEND_TIMEOUT: > > > tcpm_swap_complete(port, -ETIMEDOUT); > > > @@ -5656,23 +5662,21 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port) > > > break; > > > case GET_STATUS_SEND: > > > tcpm_pd_send_control(port, PD_CTRL_GET_STATUS, TCPC_TX_SOP); > > > - tcpm_set_state(port, GET_STATUS_SEND_TIMEOUT, > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + tcpm_set_state(port, GET_STATUS_SEND_TIMEOUT, sender_response_time); > > > break; > > > case GET_STATUS_SEND_TIMEOUT: > > > tcpm_set_state(port, ready_state(port), 0); > > > break; > > > case GET_PPS_STATUS_SEND: > > > tcpm_pd_send_control(port, PD_CTRL_GET_PPS_STATUS, TCPC_TX_SOP); > > > - tcpm_set_state(port, GET_PPS_STATUS_SEND_TIMEOUT, > > > - PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + tcpm_set_state(port, GET_PPS_STATUS_SEND_TIMEOUT, sender_response_time); > > > break; > > > case GET_PPS_STATUS_SEND_TIMEOUT: > > > tcpm_set_state(port, ready_state(port), 0); > > > break; > > > case GET_SINK_CAP: > > > tcpm_pd_send_control(port, PD_CTRL_GET_SINK_CAP, TCPC_TX_SOP); > > > - tcpm_set_state(port, GET_SINK_CAP_TIMEOUT, PD_T_SENDER_RESPONSE); > > > + tcpm_set_state(port, GET_SINK_CAP_TIMEOUT, sender_response_time); > > > break; > > > case GET_SINK_CAP_TIMEOUT: > > > port->sink_cap_done = true; > > > @@ -7109,6 +7113,18 @@ static void tcpm_fw_get_timings(struct tcpm_port *port, struct fwnode_handle *fw > > > ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(fwnode, "sink-bc12-completion-time-ms", &val); > > > if (!ret) > > > port->timings.snk_bc12_cmpletion_time = val; > > > + > > > + ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(fwnode, "pd2-sender-response-time-ms", &val); > > > + if (!ret) > > > + port->timings.pd2_sender_response_time = val; > > > + else > > > + port->timings.pd2_sender_response_time = PD_T_PD2_SENDER_RESPONSE; > > > + > > > + ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(fwnode, "pd3-sender-response-time-ms", &val); > > > + if (!ret) > > > + port->timings.pd3_sender_response_time = val; > > > + else > > > + port->timings.pd3_sender_response_time = PD_T_PD3_SENDER_RESPONSE; > > > } > > > > I can't see the whole thread, but I guess those properties were > > okay(?). > > > > thanks, > > > > -- > > heikki
