Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: gadget: don't dequeue requests on already disabled endpoints

[Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3899 bytes --]


Hi,

Michael Grzeschik <mgr@pengutronix.de> writes:
>> >> > dwc3_gadget_ep_disable gets called before the last request gets
>> >> > dequeued.
>> >> >
>> >> > In __dwc3_gadget_ep_disable all started, pending and cancelled
>> >> > lists for this endpoint will call dwc3_gadget_giveback in
>> >> > dwc3_remove_requests.
>> >> >
>> >> > After that no list containing the afterwards dequed request,
>> >> > therefor it is not necessary to run the dequeue routine.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Michael Grzeschik <m.grzeschik@pengutronix.de>
>> >> > ---
>> >> > @Lars-Peter Clausen:
>> >> >
>> >> > This patch addresses the case that not queued requests get dequeued.
>> >> > The only case that this happens seems on disabling the gadget.
>> >> >
>> >> >  drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c | 3 +++
>> >> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>> >> > index 9a6f741d1db0dc..5d4fa8d6c93e49 100644
>> >> > --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>> >> > +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
>> >> > @@ -1609,6 +1609,9 @@ static int dwc3_gadget_ep_dequeue(struct usb_ep *ep,
>> >> >  
>> >> >  	trace_dwc3_ep_dequeue(req);
>> >> >  
>> >> > +	if (!(dep->flags & DWC3_EP_ENABLED))
>> >> > +		return 0;
>> >> 
>> >> which driver is trying to call dequeue after the endpoint is disabled?
>> >> Got some tracepoints of the problem happening?
>> >
>> > I see the case when using uvc-gadget.
>> >
>> > Look into uvc_v4l2_release in uvc_v4l2.c:
>> >
>> > uvc_function_disconnect
>> >    composite_disconnect
>> >       reset_config
>> >          uvc_function_disable->usb_ep_disable
>> >
>> > uvcg_video_enable
>> >    usb_ep_dequeue
>> >       dwc3_gadget_ep_dequeue
>> 
>> Oh, I see what you mean. We get a disconnect, which disables the
>> endpoints, which forces all requests to be dequeued. Now I remember why
>> this exists: we giveback the requests from disconnect because not all
>> gadget drivers will call usb_ep_dequeue() if simply told about the
>> disconnect. Then UDC drivers have to be a little more careful and make
>> sure that all requests are givenback.
>> 
>> In any case, why is it a problem to call usb_ep_dequeue()? Is it only
>> because of that dev_err()? We could just remove that message,
>> really.
>
> In my case, it is not a problem removing the dev_err. The ep_dequeue
> will only be called once for each request at the stream end. I don't
> know about the case Lars has mentioned.

Okay

> If we have to search all lists for the request every n times while in
> traffic, only to find out that it was not enqueued, I think it would be
> worth it to keep the dev_err and let these cases trigger so we have an
> option to find and avoid/fix these.

Yeah, I agree. That's why the dev_err() was placed there to start
with. In fact, I found a few gadget drivers which were trying to reuse a
request a allocated for EPxIN and queueing it to EPxOUT, clearly a
violation of request lifetime rules.

As for the search on three separate lists, I never considered this to be
a problem since it happens so infrequently. One thing we can do to make
it maybe faster, is convert those list_for_each_entry() to
list_for_each_entry_reverse(). I'm betting that there's higher
likelihood that the oldest request will be dequeued first, then again,
this needs to be profiled.

>> Eventually, I want to move more of this logic into UDC core so
>> udc drivers can be simplified. For that work, though, first we would
>> have to add a "generic" struct usb_ep_hw implementation and manage list
>> of requests as part of UDC core as well.
>
> I don't know about the cases you plan to abstract but it sounds
> like a good idea to get some gadget logic out of the drivers.

Yeah, this will take a lot of time, though. Hopefully it'll happen :-)

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]