From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org>
To: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com>,
David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>,
Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>,
Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@baikalelectronics.ru>,
Pavel Parkhomenko <Pavel.Parkhomenko@baikalelectronics.ru>,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] usb: dwc3: ulpi: Replace CPU-based busyloop with Protocol-based one
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 11:18:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h7qgc9hg.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201010222351.7323-3-Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2800 bytes --]
Hi,
Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes:
> Originally the procedure of the ULPI transaction finish detection has been
> developed as a simple busy-loop with just decrementing counter and no
> delays. It's wrong since on different systems the loop will take a
> different time to complete. So if the system bus and CPU are fast enough
> to overtake the ULPI bus and the companion PHY reaction, then we'll get to
> take a false timeout error. Fix this by converting the busy-loop procedure
> to take the standard bus speed, address value and the registers access
> mode into account for the busy-loop delay calculation.
>
> Here is the way the fix works. It's known that the ULPI bus is clocked
> with 60MHz signal. In accordance with [1] the ULPI bus protocol is created
> so to spend 5 and 6 clock periods for immediate register write and read
> operations respectively, and 6 and 7 clock periods - for the extended
> register writes and reads. Based on that we can easily pre-calculate the
> time which will be needed for the controller to perform a requested IO
> operation. Note we'll still preserve the attempts counter in case if the
> DWC USB3 controller has got some internals delays.
>
> [1] UTMI+ Low Pin Interface (ULPI) Specification, Revision 1.1,
> October 20, 2004, pp. 30 - 36.
>
> Fixes: 88bc9d194ff6 ("usb: dwc3: add ULPI interface support")
> Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
> ---
> drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c
> index 20f5d9aba317..0dbc826355a5 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c
> @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@
> * Author: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
> */
>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/time64.h>
> #include <linux/ulpi/regs.h>
>
> #include "core.h"
> @@ -17,12 +19,22 @@
> DWC3_GUSB2PHYACC_ADDR(ULPI_ACCESS_EXTENDED) | \
> DWC3_GUSB2PHYACC_EXTEND_ADDR(a) : DWC3_GUSB2PHYACC_ADDR(a))
>
> -static int dwc3_ulpi_busyloop(struct dwc3 *dwc)
> +#define DWC3_ULPI_BASE_DELAY DIV_ROUND_UP(NSEC_PER_SEC, 60000000L)
> +
> +static int dwc3_ulpi_busyloop(struct dwc3 *dwc, u8 addr, bool read)
> {
> + unsigned long ns = 5L * DWC3_ULPI_BASE_DELAY;
> unsigned count = 1000;
> u32 reg;
>
> + if (addr >= ULPI_EXT_VENDOR_SPECIFIC)
> + ns += DWC3_ULPI_BASE_DELAY;
> +
> + if (read)
> + ns += DWC3_ULPI_BASE_DELAY;
> +
> while (count--) {
> + ndelay(ns);
could we allow for a sleep here instead of a delay? Also, I wonder if
you need to make this so complex or should we just take the larger
access time of 7 clock cycles.
--
balbi
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 857 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-27 9:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-10 22:23 [PATCH 0/3] usb: dwc3: ulpi: Fix UPLI registers read/write ops Serge Semin
2020-10-10 22:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] usb: dwc3: ulpi: Use VStsDone to detect PHY regs access completion Serge Semin
2020-10-27 9:15 ` Felipe Balbi
2020-10-27 20:13 ` Serge Semin
2020-10-10 22:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] usb: dwc3: ulpi: Replace CPU-based busyloop with Protocol-based one Serge Semin
2020-10-27 9:18 ` Felipe Balbi [this message]
2020-10-27 21:06 ` Serge Semin
2020-10-10 22:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] usb: dwc3: ulpi: Fix USB2.0 HS/FS/LS PHY suspend regression Serge Semin
2020-10-19 13:58 ` [PATCH 0/3] usb: dwc3: ulpi: Fix UPLI registers read/write ops Heikki Krogerus
2020-10-27 9:13 ` Felipe Balbi
2020-10-27 20:07 ` Serge Semin
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=87h7qgc9hg.fsf@kernel.org \
--to=balbi@kernel.org \
--cc=Alexey.Malahov@baikalelectronics.ru \
--cc=Pavel.Parkhomenko@baikalelectronics.ru \
--cc=Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=fancer.lancer@gmail.com \
--cc=felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).