From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932364AbaLWXs6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2014 18:48:58 -0500 Received: from comal.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.152]:45712 "EHLO comal.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932332AbaLWXs4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2014 18:48:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 17:48:37 -0600 From: Felipe Balbi To: Carsten Behling CC: , , Subject: Re: usb: musb: Scheduling of interrupt endpoints Message-ID: <20141223234837.GB32702@saruman> Reply-To: References: <54947E99.4010908@ridgerun.com> <5499835B.508@ridgerun.com> <20141223182737.GF9147@saruman> <5499CDB9.6050602@ridgerun.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qcHopEYAB45HaUaB" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5499CDB9.6050602@ridgerun.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --qcHopEYAB45HaUaB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 02:16:57PM -0600, Carsten Behling wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 08:59:39AM -0600, Carsten Behling wrote: > >>Would it help if I send a patch as a suggestion and as basis for > >>discussion? > >yes, it would also help if you didn't top-post :-) > > > So would you suggestion be to port that feature from the old > linux-2.6.32.17-psp03.01.01.39 > kernel from TI or should we rather add a tree based implementation as done > for OHCI? quite frankly, I don't know and, because of my email domain, I can't really say out loud what I really think about those old TI releases :-) IMHO, the best thing would be to completely ignore old kernels and have a critical look at that part of the code on MUSB Host. Right now, MUSB has a really brain dead endpoint allocation algorithm and it only works for bulk (dynamic allocation, that is). Interrupt and isochronous are left out of dynamic allocation which, IMHO, makes no sense what so ever. I guess the users of MUSB would benefit a whole lot more if someone were to redesign that logic altogether so that all endpoints can be dynamically allocated. One easy way to test things out is to attach a ton of hubs and several USB Serial adapters to a single MUSB port. All hubs and all USB serial adapters - of course, as long as you follow USB spec's limitation on maximum tier level and maximum number of devices. cheers --=20 balbi --qcHopEYAB45HaUaB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUmf9VAAoJEIaOsuA1yqRE6mgP/j6CdQde/y1iDbNBEzdCRiyS BQDG8Yl++Ng8GNf6q47lurg0hvGWcFVf6J7TYVNNKnKAzBt8Vlu3go4/yW80Tox3 ypRU+hOWPWlYbILghIkfyOmvqDvYh3wl3bqeoLa/t9J8Iv1FtCe9heB4VZr1yNo0 +5/AZiqLV6Du9q/Ek8CpaVPjEcxUkF6gsIZzCtLrhXbMNPUfiqWECayZWzM6dxSj 686CwcOG4YCDeB9FgcB+1wVqzaq///0Sz4D9UmYV8zzEc03tYIBSQywSS/D1lERw gFgJs5szjDdWlJzTqQ3YSqJDrbkH0+60lNOGE+SgyZKpfJ1eMW8T8Q7xd1loA3/K //X3nuA8ThcsUhV2nhfNqic9f1vWfMiPsJvqvhQ2nh+yFQHSR785z1YyftfkiM6c kKaEiVmO7w9nd0POurBXqpE14Fd/ujH9rrqPUyWa4Pv8nvvii7Dn6yKmeI46BxhQ x7VEMXXW0nZq+A91BPxICXjgCDD4/vMYngWRgRwQNUgzCqMZX9epJ2RVETPtjNYB vSEeT337cCU/lobV4k6Ex/w4+LFw9g5a/qjfYsPSlju+60WS9qz4TeY00xY91CIe yzRzCXsL688KTWvA08xPcB57sqsIkSLejzly52bI7F5SqFJT8BGsEaqUnBCYhYuN z9HZJGCkqgWWfRfjQpaX =AmTV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qcHopEYAB45HaUaB--