From: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com>
To: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: usb: usbtest: Add TEST 29, toggle sync, Clear toggle between bulk writes
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 10:59:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r2rwl62y.fsf@linux.intel.com> (raw)
Hi,
Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com> writes:
> On 14.12.2017 20:12, Alan Stern wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2017, Mathias Nyman wrote:
>>
>>> Clear Feature Endpoint Halt should reset the data toggle even if the
>>> endpoint isn't halted. Host should manage to clear the host side data
>>> toggle to keep in sync with the device.
>>>
>>> Test by sending a "3 data packet URB" before and after clearing the halt.
>>> this should create a toggle sequence with two consecutive DATA0 packets.
>>>
>>> A successful test sequence looks like this
>>> ClearFeature(ENDPOINT_HALT) - initial toggle clear
>>> DATA0 (max packet sized)
>>> DATA1 (max packet sized)
>>> DATA0 (zero length packet)
>>> ClearFeature(ENDPOINT_HALT) - resets toggle
>>> DATA0 (max packet sized), if clear halt fails then toggle is DATA1
>>> DATA1 (max packet sized)
>>> DATA0 (zero length packet)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> This test is a little unusual in that it doesn't contain a way to
>> detect failures. That is, you can't tell from the test results whether
>> the device and the host behaved the way they are supposed to (in the
>> case of the host, you could use a USB analyzer to find out).
>>
>> Also, some devices don't handle Clear-Halt requests properly if the
>> endpoint isn't already halted. Presumably people wouldn't use one of
>> those devices for this test! :-)
>
> I was hoping that the device (dwc3 with zero gadget in my case) would
> somehow react if the host sends a DATA1 packet right after
> ClearFeature(ENDPOINT_HALT), but turns out this device accepts it and
> continues to work just fine. So I ended up looking at the traffic with
that's because we prevent clear halt when endpoint is not halted. That
was changed when a problem was found when enumerating against macOS. It
may be that we're actually hiding an IP bug by doing that, however I
never got an argument strong enough to revert the commit.
This, may just be the strong argument I need :-)
next reply other threads:[~2017-12-15 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-15 8:59 Felipe Balbi [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-12-15 17:02 usb: usbtest: Add TEST 29, toggle sync, Clear toggle between bulk writes Alan Stern
2017-12-15 8:49 Mathias Nyman
2017-12-15 8:20 Felipe Balbi
2017-12-14 18:12 Alan Stern
2017-12-14 16:39 Mathias Nyman
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=87r2rwl62y.fsf@linux.intel.com \
--to=felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/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).