From: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>
To: Prashanth K <prashanth.k@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Kees Bakker <kees@ijzerbout.nl>,
William McVicker <willmcvicker@google.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"stable@kernel.org" <stable@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] usb: gadget: Use get_status callback to set remote wakeup capability
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 00:55:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250409005524.fbehw2gonv3p7j2v@synopsys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d68cb04-377f-4ebf-99c7-c63b68aebf60@oss.qualcomm.com>
On Tue, Apr 08, 2025, Prashanth K wrote:
>
>
> On 08-04-25 06:48 am, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 03, 2025, Prashanth K wrote:
> >> Currently when the host sends GET_STATUS request for an interface,
> >> we use get_status callbacks to set/clear remote wakeup capability
> >> of that interface. And if get_status callback isn't present for
> >> that interface, then we assume its remote wakeup capability based
> >> on bmAttributes.
> >>
> >> Now consider a scenario, where we have a USB configuration with
> >> multiple interfaces (say ECM + ADB), here ECM is remote wakeup
> >> capable and as of now ADB isn't. And bmAttributes will indicate
> >> the device as wakeup capable. With the current implementation,
> >> when host sends GET_STATUS request for both interfaces, we will
> >> set FUNC_RW_CAP for both. This results in USB3 CV Chapter 9.15
> >> (Function Remote Wakeup Test) failures as host expects remote
> >> wakeup from both interfaces.
> >>
> >> The above scenario is just an example, and the failure can be
> >> observed if we use configuration with any interface except ECM.
> >> Hence avoid configuring remote wakeup capability from composite
> >> driver based on bmAttributes, instead use get_status callbacks
> >> and let the function drivers decide this.
> >>
> >> Cc: stable@kernel.org
> >> Fixes: 481c225c4802 ("usb: gadget: Handle function suspend feature selector")
> >> Signed-off-by: Prashanth K <prashanth.k@oss.qualcomm.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c | 12 ++++--------
> >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
> >> index 869ad99afb48..5c6da360e95b 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
> >> @@ -2010,16 +2010,12 @@ composite_setup(struct usb_gadget *gadget, const struct usb_ctrlrequest *ctrl)
> >> break;
> >>
> >> if (f->get_status) {
> >> - status = f->get_status(f);
> >> + /* if D5 is not set, then device is not wakeup capable */
> >> + if (f->config->bmAttributes & USB_CONFIG_ATT_WAKEUP)
> >
> > We should allow function to execute get_status regardless of
> > USB_CONFIG_ATT_WAKEUP. There are other status beside wakeup.
> >
> Agree with the first part, I also wanted to remove the explicit check
> for USB_CONFIG_ATT_WAKEUP. But anyways kept it since only 2 bits (RW_CAP
> and RW) are defined in the spec as the status of GetStatus for an Interface.
>
> Lets do one thing, I'll rearrange it as follows
>
> if (f->get_status) {
> status = f->get_status(f);
>
> /* if D5 is not set, then device is not wakeup capable */
> if (f->config->bmAttributes & USB_CONFIG_ATT_WAKEUP)
> status &= ~(USB_INTRF_STAT_FUNC_RW_CAP | USB_INTRF_STAT_FUNC_RW);
Yes, something like this works, but I think you mean this:
if (!(f->config->bmAttributes & USB_CONFIG_ATT_WAKEUP))
...
>
> >> + status = f->get_status(f);
> >> +
> >> if (status < 0)
> >> break;
> >> - } else {
> >> - /* Set D0 and D1 bits based on func wakeup capability */
> >> - if (f->config->bmAttributes & USB_CONFIG_ATT_WAKEUP) {
> >> - status |= USB_INTRF_STAT_FUNC_RW_CAP;
> >
> >
> > So right now we're not able to configure the function to enable RW
> > capable? Perhaps we need to update the composite configfs for this?
> >
>
> The removed code used to set USB_INTRF_STAT_FUNC_RW_CAP even for
> interfaces which doesn't have RW capability. Its better to handle this
> from function level than from composite.
>
Not at the gadget level, I mean to create a configfs attribute common
across different functions to allow the user to enable/disable the
function wakeup capability via the configfs when you setup the function.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Thinh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-09 0:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-03 11:08 [PATCH v1 0/3] Fixes for USB3 CV Chapter 9.15 tests Prashanth K
2025-04-03 11:08 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] usb: gadget: f_ecm: Add get_status callback Prashanth K
2025-04-08 1:08 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-08 5:05 ` Prashanth K
2025-04-09 0:56 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-03 11:08 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] usb: gadget: Use get_status callback to set remote wakeup capability Prashanth K
2025-04-08 1:18 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-08 5:06 ` Prashanth K
2025-04-09 0:55 ` Thinh Nguyen [this message]
2025-04-09 4:22 ` Prashanth K
2025-04-09 22:05 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-09 22:12 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-10 6:08 ` Prashanth K
2025-04-11 1:00 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-03 11:08 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] usb: dwc3: gadget: Make gadget_wakeup asynchronous Prashanth K
2025-04-07 23:38 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-08 5:34 ` Prashanth K
2025-04-09 0:43 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-09 4:15 ` Prashanth K
2025-04-09 21:51 ` Thinh Nguyen
2025-04-10 5:48 ` Prashanth K
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=20250409005524.fbehw2gonv3p7j2v@synopsys.com \
--to=thinh.nguyen@synopsys.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kees@ijzerbout.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=prashanth.k@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=stable@kernel.org \
--cc=willmcvicker@google.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