>-----Original Message----- >From: Zhang, Sonic >Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 12:46 PM >To: Bob Liu; Ming Lei >Cc: Cai, Cliff; David Brownell; Mike Frysinger; Sergei >Shtylyov; Greg KH; Linux USB Mailing List; Felipe Balbi; >eballetbo@xxxxxxxxx; notasas@xxxxxxxxx; >uclinux-dist-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxx; >Anand Gadiyar >Subject: RE: [Uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH 04/11] USB: musb: >gadget: fix MUSB_TXMAXP and MUSB_RXMAXP configuration > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: uclinux-dist-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>[mailto:uclinux-dist-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of >>Bob Liu >>Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 12:34 PM >>To: Ming Lei >>Cc: Cai, Cliff; David Brownell; Mike Frysinger; Sergei Shtylyov; Greg >>KH; Linux USB Mailing List; Felipe Balbi; eballetbo@xxxxxxxxx; >>notasas@xxxxxxxxx; uclinux-dist-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; >>stable@xxxxxxxxxx; Anand Gadiyar >>Subject: Re: [Uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH 04/11] USB: musb: >>gadget: fix MUSB_TXMAXP and MUSB_RXMAXP configuration >> >>On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Bob Liu <lliubbo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Ming Lei >><tom.leiming@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> 2010/11/9 Bob Liu <lliubbo@xxxxxxxxx>: >>>>> Hi, Ming >>>>> >>>>> I found out the cause of this problem on our platform. >>>>> >>>>> According to our hardware reference manuel, big changes >are needed >>>>> to support double buffer(eg. it depends on SOF interrupt >and rxcsr >>>>> fifofull bit etc). We need more time to work on these. >>>> >>>> Could you give which page or which section about the description? >>>> Seems bfin otg TRM is open. >>>> >>>> If not, could you describe the problem in more detail? >>>> >>> >>> Our spec said when double buffering enabled " >>> Set up an ISR, sensitive to the SOF_B interrupt, that reads the >>> FIFO_FULL_R bit, reads the USB_RXCOUNT status register, and finally >>> removes one or two packets (equaling from the USB_RXCOUNT number of >>> bytes) from the FIFO and clears RXPKTRDY. >>> >>> Set SOF_B=1 in USB_INTRUSBE to generate an interrupt on each >>start of >>> frame. >>> " >>> >> >>Some addition, the full spec said is >>" >>Peripheral Mode, ISO OUT, Small MaxPktSize The programming value for >>the maximum individual packet size (MaxPkt- >>Size) in bytes is <128 bytes, and double buffering is assumed as >>enabled for this process: >>1. Load MaxPktSize into USB_RX_MAX_PACKET 2. Set ISO_R=1 in USB_RXCSR >>3. Set up an ISR, sensitive to the SOF_B interrupt, that reads the >>FIFO_FULL_R bit, reads the USB_RXCOUNT status register, and finally >>removes one or two packets (equaling from the USB_RXCOUNT number of >>bytes) from the FIFO and clears RXPKTRDY. >>4. Set SOF_B=1 in USB_INTRUSBE to generate an interrupt on each start >>of frame. >>5. Step 4 is repeated for each ISO packet. >>" >>It only said double buffer mod on ISO mode,I need to confirm if it >>works the same in bulk transfer. >> >>And after added this patch, the detail problem on our platform is: >>g_zero test case 5 will receive corrupted data, but after added >>udelay(50) on rx interrupt it works fine. >>So I can't give any log, because added printk, it also works well. >> > >It seems in double buffer mode the Blackfin MUSB controller >needs about 50us delay between the packet RX interrupt and RX >buffer reading operation. Otherwise, wrong data is read out of >the MUSB RX buffer. Single buffer mode has no such problem. >So, we are looking for a way to set up single buffer mode >under MUSB framework if the original patch against 1.9 and >less MUSB version doesn't work for others. > Yes,to disable double buffering is the original purpose of my patch. And since there is no control bits to implement it,we have to do this. Cliff > >>>>> >>>>> So Felipe, >>>>> is patch like this can be accepted ? >>>>> ============ >>>>> - if (musb->hwvers < MUSB_HWVERS_2000) >>>>> if (musb->hwvers < MUSB_HWVERS_2000 && >>>>> !musb->dyn_fifo) >>>>> musb_writew(regs, MUSB_TXMAXP, >>>>> hw_ep->max_packet_sz_tx); >>>>> else >>>>> musb_writew(regs, MUSB_TXMAXP, >>>>> musb_ep->packet_sz | (musb_ep->hb_mult << 11)); >>>>> >>>>> or >>>>> >>>>> - if (musb->hwvers < MUSB_HWVERS_2000) >>>>> if (musb->hwvers < MUSB_HWVERS_2000 && >>>>> musb->config->gpio_vrsel) >>>>> musb_writew(regs, MUSB_TXMAXP, >>>>> hw_ep->max_packet_sz_tx); >>>>> else >>>>> musb_writew(regs, MUSB_TXMAXP, >>>>> musb_ep->packet_sz | (musb_ep->hb_mult << 11)); >>>>> >>>> >>>> I don't think either one can be accepted. >>>> >>>> This two still can make g_ether or full speed test broken in bfin, >>>> can't this? >>>> >>> >>> We didn't see g_ether problem on our platform without this >>patch, it works fine. >>> Could you give detail step how to reproduce the g_ether problem? >>> >>> >>>>> If not, are there any suggestions how to deal with this problem. >>>>> How to support no dyn_fifo and only support single buffer >>platform ? >>>> >>>> What is the problem? See above. >>>> >>> >>> After added this patch, double buffer will always auto >>enabled on our >>> platform which will cause problem as our spec said on double buffer >>> mode it use SOF_B interrupt and FIFO_FULL_R bit etc. >>> >>> So we want a way to keep this route on our platform but >>nomore on yours. >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks, >>> --Bob >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>Uclinux-dist-devel mailing list >>Uclinux-dist-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>https://blackfin.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dist-devel >> > -- 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
