On 12/12/2010 10:58 PM, Pavan Kondeti wrote: > On 12/12/2010 12:03 PM, Artem Leonenko wrote: >> On 12/11/2010 09:32 PM, Pavan Kondeti wrote: >>> Hi Artem, >>> >>> On 12/11/2010 11:42 PM, Artem Leonenko wrote: >>>> On 12/11/2010 06:14 AM, pkondeti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>> Do you suggest to wait until complete() callback finishes? The earlier >>>> we will prime EP the faster data will be transmitted. >>>> >>> I was saying that (b) is sufficient to fix the problem. I agree that >>> priming the endpoint before calling complete gives faster data rates. >> >>> I was telling (b) and (c) are same. >> >> I'm sorry, I misread that >> > No problem :-) > >>>> Can you try to test g_ether with your ci13xxx core with my patches? The >>>> ci13xxx IP cores have many different flavors/features depending on >>>> SoC/core instantiation. I wonder whether your core works with >>>> default alignment or not. >>>> >>> Sure. I will test it on monday. But am sure that it will work without >>> alignment change. Because g_ether is working fine on MSM with another >>> controller driver (not ci13xxx_udc). >> >> Thanks. However it isn't clear to me how can you make an assumption >> about ci13xxx USB IP core based on features of other USB core. Yes >> there could be a chance that both cores have same feature. >> > Sorry. I should have explained clearly. Initially I have posted another > controller driver for MSM SoC which has chipidea USB core. I have > received feedback to re-use ci13xxx_udc driver. I have seen g_ether > working fine without changing NET_IP_ALIGN with my initial driver. > > Please see http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg38460.html > Ah, everything is clear now. >> FYI, comment from drivers/usb/gadget/amd5536udc.c file (also search >> for NET_IP_ALIGN in gadget/Kconfig): >> >>> * UDC DMA requires 32-bit aligned buffers so DMA with gadget ether >> does not >>> * work without updating NET_IP_ALIGN. Or PIO mode (module param >> "use_dma=0") >>> * can be used with gadget ether. >> >> You see working g_ether with some UDCs doesn't guarantee that it will >> work with others. I have a proposal of relaxing alignment requirements >> and thus increasing the number of supported ci13xxx cores/their >> instantiations. Don't know if there is something better way to handle >> that. Any ideas? > > There was some discussion happened on the same issue. But nothing is > finalized. I am also not sure about changing NET_IP_ALIGN macro as it > may have some other side effects (I was told changing NET_IP_ALIGN makes > parsing difficult in network layers and is inefficient). > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg25411.html > Thanks for the link. I guess it would be better to drop that part of the patch for now and wait for the final fix from that thread. Hope it'll be possible to use the same approach with minimal changes. I'll send updated patches in few minutes. >> >>> Thanks, >>> Pavan >>> -- Cheers, Artem -- 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
