From: Elson Serrao <elson.serrao@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>
Cc: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Add version check for setting ForceRM
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 13:44:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3ae42f16-ead2-4811-9b5e-da42bf81d477@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <anUevdJ3ZNaYyB61@vbox>
On 8/6/2026 5:19 PM, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2026, Elson Serrao wrote:
>> Hi Thinh,
>>
>> We are observing an issue on DWC_usb31 v2.00a and v2.10a controllers where
>> a transfer aborted through the ep_dequeue() path continues to generate
>> writes even after EndTransfer has completed. In our testing, the issue was
[...]
>> Thanks,
>> Elson
>>
>> Elson Serrao (1):
>> usb: dwc3: gadget: add version check for setting ForceRM
>>
>> drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c | 7 +++++++
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
>
> Hi Elson,
>
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> This new recommendation applies to all 3.2 controllers also.
>
> I don't recall forceRM=0 causing any issue to previous versions.
>
> I would suggest applying this change across all IPs and IP versions to
> keep consistent behavior when ending transfers since TRBs are updated on
> completion. Since older IP databooks recommended setting forceRM=1, can
> you also add a note in the code indicating newer programming guideline
> revisions now recommend forceRM=0?
>
Hi Thinh,
Thanks for the clarification.
Since forceRM should now always be 0, and the reset value of forceRM is
already 0, the function parameter force=false effectively becomes a
no-op. Would you recommend we drop the 'bool force' argument from stop
active transfers API entirely (documenting the forceRM behavior in a
comment)?
Or would you prefer we keep the parameter and just have all callers pass
'false' , so the API/framework stays in place in case a future IP/version
needs it again?
Let me know which approach you'd prefer and I'll send an updated patch.
Thanks,
Elson
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-10 20:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-06 23:40 [PATCH 0/1] Add version check for setting ForceRM Elson Serrao
2026-08-06 23:40 ` [PATCH 1/1] usb: dwc3: gadget: add " Elson Serrao
2026-08-07 0:19 ` [PATCH 0/1] Add " Thinh Nguyen
2026-08-10 20:44 ` Elson Serrao [this message]
2026-08-10 22:35 ` Thinh Nguyen
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=3ae42f16-ead2-4811-9b5e-da42bf81d477@oss.qualcomm.com \
--to=elson.serrao@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@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