Linux USB
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>
Cc: Diederik de Haas <diederik@cknow-tech.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, Shengwen Xiao <atzlinux@sina.com>,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: OHCI/UHCI: Add soft dependencies on ehci_hcd
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2026 10:13:50 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <34c7edd0-3c0c-4a57-b0ea-71e4cba2ef26@rowland.harvard.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAhV-H5GdkMg-uzMpDQPGLs+gWNAy6ZOH33VoLqnNyWbRenNDw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 10:36:35AM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2025 at 11:21 PM Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 31, 2025 at 05:38:05PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > > From your long explanation I think the order is still important. "New
> > > connection" may be harmless for USB keyboard/mouse, but really
> > > unacceptable for USB storage.
> > >
> > > If we revert 05c92da0c524 and 9beeee6584b9, the real problem doesn't
> > > disappear. Then we go back to pre-2008 to rely on distributions
> > > providing a correct modprobe.conf?
> >
> > The warning message in 9beeee6584b9 was written a long time ago; back
> > then I didn't realize that the real dependency was between the -pci
> > drivers rather than the -hcd ones (and I wasn't aware of softdeps).  The
> > soft dependency in 05c92da0c524 is between the -pci drivers, so it is
> > correct.
> >
> > To put it another way, on PCI-based systems it is not a problem if the
> > modules are loaded in this order: uhci-hcd, ohci-hcd, ehci-hcd,
> > ehci-pci, ohci-pci, uhci-pci.  Even though the warning message would be
> > logged, the message would be wrong.
> Correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> I found XHCI is compatible with USB1.0/2.0 devices,

Yes.

>  but EHCI isn't
> compatible with USB1.0. Instead, EHCI usually has an OHCI together,
> this is not only in the PCI case.

It's more complicated than that.

For quite a long time now, most systems using EHCI have not included a 
companion OHCI or UHCI controller.  Instead they include a built-in 
USB-2.0 hub; the hub is wired directly into the EHCI controller and the 
external ports are connected to the hub.  USB-2.0 hubs include 
transaction translators that relay packets between high-speed and low- 
or full-speed connections, so they can talk to both USB-1 and USB-2 
devices.  Hence no companion controller is needed.

I don't remember when Intel starting selling chipsets like this, but it 
was probably around 2000 or earlier.  (Some non-Intel-based systems 
included a transaction translator directly in the root hub, so they 
didn't even need to have an additional USB-2.0 hub.)

Before that, systems did include companion controllers along with an 
EHCI controller.  I don't know of any non-PCI systems that did this, but 
of course some may exist.  However, the EHCI-1.0 specification says this 
in section 4.2 "Port Routing and Control" (p. 54):

	The USB 2.0 host controller must be implemented as a 
	multi-function PCI device if the implementation
	includes companion controllers.

> So I guess OHCI/UHCI have an EHCI dependency in order to avoid "new
> connection", not only in the PCI case.

Do you know of any non-PCI systems that do this?

Alan Stern

  reply	other threads:[~2026-01-02 15:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-30  8:00 [PATCH] USB: OHCI/UHCI: Add soft dependencies on ehci_hcd Huacai Chen
2025-12-30  8:15 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2025-12-30  9:00   ` xiao sheng wen(肖盛文)
2025-12-30 14:40   ` Diederik de Haas
2025-12-30 16:42     ` Alan Stern
2025-12-31  9:38       ` Huacai Chen
2025-12-31 15:20         ` Alan Stern
2026-01-02  2:36           ` Huacai Chen
2026-01-02 15:13             ` Alan Stern [this message]
2026-01-03  3:16               ` Huacai Chen
2026-01-03  3:33                 ` Alan Stern
2026-01-03  3:57                   ` Huacai Chen
2026-01-03 16:41                     ` Alan Stern
2026-01-10  4:05                       ` Huacai Chen
2026-01-10 15:00                         ` Alan Stern
2026-01-11  1:54                           ` Huacai Chen
2026-01-11  2:04                             ` Alan Stern
2025-12-31 17:33       ` Diederik de Haas
2025-12-31 18:09         ` Alan Stern
2025-12-30 16:23   ` Alan Stern

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=34c7edd0-3c0c-4a57-b0ea-71e4cba2ef26@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --to=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=atzlinux@sina.com \
    --cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
    --cc=chenhuacai@loongson.cn \
    --cc=diederik@cknow-tech.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /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