From: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>
To: Michal Pecio <michal.pecio@gmail.com>,
Wesley Cheng <wesley.cheng@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sound@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add larger page size support for USB audio offload path
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 14:44:42 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <05117737-8793-4db9-9815-f617ac085d82@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260826122552.5761dea2.michal.pecio@gmail.com>
On 8/26/26 13:25, Michal Pecio wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 00:50:53 -0700, Wesley Cheng wrote:
>> Thanks for this suggestion. I think it actually makes the overall
>> design a lot better. So now that the sideband driver has its own
>> segment pool (per sideband instance), we expect that any page
>> allocations done from this pool is technically owned by the audio
>> DSP. This allows us to still utilize 4k ring segments, while mapping
>> the entire 16k page, so it helps conserve/optimize the memory
>> allocations. I will do a bit more testing and review before
>> submitting a new revision w/ these changes.
>
> The part about memory being "owned by the audio DSP" made me wonder
> if it would be helpful to let offload drivers allocate their own memory
> and then just dma_map() it for the xHC. No new rings would be allocated
> for offloaded endpoints when they are enabled, we would point Endpoint
> Context of the xHC to the sideband ring and leave ep->ring as NULL.
>
> Offload drivers would have full control over memory allocation - size,
> number of segments (it seems that qc-usb-audio only uses one out of two
> allocated by xhci-hcd), alignment, anything else.
>
> It would become impossible to offload an endpoint which is already
> enabled, but is this an issue for anyone?
>
> NULL ep->ring will cause oopses/panics when somebody submits URBs to
> offloaded endpoints, but I think it wouldn't be a problem otherwise.
>
I have similar thoughts.
One idea would be to basically let sideband allocate the entire ring and set
ep->new_ring early. This would tell xhci_endpoint_init() that a ring exists and
a new one should not be allocated.
xhci ring allocation would need some refactoring to create helpers for sideband
to allocate and initialize all the other parts of the ring.
This is something that VTIO (xhci spec section 4.25) would also need.
There an endpoint can be handed over to a secondary DMA ID (second, new PCI BDF),
that the normal xhci driver can be excluded from with iommu.
VTIO use case is something like trusted VM accessing a secure usb storage device,
preventing regular OS running the xhci driver in another VM from touching it.
The secure VM needs to allocate and map the ring to this secondary PCI BDF
Thanks
Mathias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-26 11:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-25 2:06 [PATCH 0/2] Add larger page size support for USB audio offload path Wesley Cheng
2026-08-25 2:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] xhci: sideband: support page-aligned ring segment allocation Wesley Cheng
2026-08-25 2:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] ALSA: usb-audio: qcom: request page-aligned xHCI ring buffers Wesley Cheng
2026-08-25 7:43 ` [PATCH 0/2] Add larger page size support for USB audio offload path Michal Pecio
2026-08-25 19:08 ` Wesley Cheng
2026-08-26 7:50 ` Wesley Cheng
2026-08-26 10:25 ` Michal Pecio
2026-08-26 11:44 ` Mathias Nyman [this message]
2026-08-26 19:58 ` Wesley Cheng
2026-08-25 11:09 ` Takashi Iwai
2026-08-25 19:09 ` Wesley Cheng
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=05117737-8793-4db9-9815-f617ac085d82@linux.intel.com \
--to=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sound@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathias.nyman@intel.com \
--cc=michal.pecio@gmail.com \
--cc=perex@perex.cz \
--cc=tiwai@suse.com \
--cc=wesley.cheng@oss.qualcomm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox