Re: [RFC v4 2/5] usb: dwc3: core: Refactor PHY logic to support Multiport Controller

[Krishna Kurapati PSSNV <quic_kriskura@quicinc.com>]

On 1/20/2023 6:32 AM, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2023, Krishna Kurapati PSSNV wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1/19/2023 6:06 AM, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2023, Krishna Kurapati wrote:
>>>> Currently the DWC3 driver supports only single port controller
>>>> which requires at most one HS and one SS PHY.
>>>
>>> Add note here that multi-port is for host mode for clarity.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But the DWC3 USB controller can be connected to multiple ports and
>>>> each port can have their own PHYs. Each port of the multiport
>>>> controller can either be HS+SS capable or HS only capable
>>>> Proper quantification of them is required to modify GUSB2PHYCFG
>>>> and GUSB3PIPECTL registers appropriately.
>>>>
>>>> Add support for detecting, obtaining and configuring phy's supported
>>>> by a multiport controller and limit the max number of ports
>>>> supported to 4.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Harsh Agarwal <quic_harshq@quicinc.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Krishna Kurapati <quic_kriskura@quicinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c | 304 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>>>>    drivers/usb/dwc3/core.h |  15 +-
>>>>    drivers/usb/dwc3/drd.c  |  14 +-
>>>>    3 files changed, 244 insertions(+), 89 deletions(-)
>>>>
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>>> @@ -1575,6 +1690,21 @@ static void dwc3_get_properties(struct dwc3 *dwc)
>>>>    	dwc->dis_split_quirk = device_property_read_bool(dev,
>>>>    				"snps,dis-split-quirk");
>>>> +
>>>> +	/*
>>>> +	 * If no mulitport properties are defined, default
>>>
>>> multi*
>>>
>>>> +	 * the port count to '1'.
>>>> +	 */
>>>
>>> Can we initialize num_ports and num_ss_ports to 1 instead of setting it
>>> on error (similar to how we handle other properties).
>>>
>> Hi Thinh,
>>
>>    Thanks for the review. On the bindings, Rob and Krzysztof have suggested
>> to get the num-ports and num-ss-ports by counting the Phy-names in DT.
> 
> This may be a bit problematic for non-DT device. Currently pci devices
> pass fake DT properties to send these kinds of info. But that's fine,
> we can enhance dwc3 for non-DT devices later.
> 
>>
>> Since there may be many cases where the user might skip giving any Phy's or
>> even skip different ports in the DT if he doesn't want to use them, can we
>> design/refactor the below logic as follows while mandating the fact that
>> user must give the SS Phy's if any starting from Port-0.:
>>
>> num-ss-ports = max_port_index (usb3-portX) + 1
>> num-ports = max (max_port_index(usb2-portX), num-ss-ports) + 1
>>
>> Ex: If there are 3 ports and only 1 is SS capable and user decides to skip
>> port-2 HS Phy.
>>
>> case-1: phy-names = "usb2-port0", "usb3-port0", "usb2-port-1"
>> case-2: phy-names = "usb2-port0", "usb2-port-1", "usb3-port1"
>>
>> In both cases, only one SS is present, just the order is changed. (Not sure
>> if last few ports can be made SS Capable instead of the first ports on any
>> HW) ?
>>
>> But according to the above formula:
>>
>> In case-1 : (num-ports = 2, num-ss-ports = 1) - This is correct
>> In case-2: (num-ports = 2, num-ss-ports = 2) - This is wrong
>>
> 
> Can't we just walk through all the phy names to figure that out? Let's
> not require the user to specify Port-0 is SS capable if they can skip
> it.
> 
Hi Thinh,

Thanks for the review.

   May be I wasn't able to convey my intention properly in my previous 
thread. The above suggested method doesn't tell that user must not skip 
any phy.

Let us take the below case for 2 Port (HS+SS) capable controller.
If the user skips ss-phy 2, then:

phy-names = "usb2-port0", "usb3-port0", "usb2-port-1"

We don't need to configure GUSB3PIPECTL2 (for port-2) register ere. If 
we parse phy-names and find it out, we see there are 2 hs-phy's and 
1-ssphy and num-ports = 2 and num-ss-ports = 1.

If the user skips ss-phy-1, then phy-names would be something like the 
below:

phy-names = "usb2-port0", "usb2-port-1",  "usb3-port1";

We need to handle two types of interpretations here while parsing the 
phy-names:

a) There are 2 SS Phy's and we just skipped the first one. In this 
scenario, if we consider (num-ss-ports = 2) and (num-ports = 2) by using 
the above formula as reference, we configure both GUSB3PIPECTL registers 
present in the address map although we never use SS Phy-1 but nothing 
must break. All ports would still work as the user intends with the 
exception of GUSB3PIPECTL1 (for-port1) still being modified.

b) The second interpretation is something like, port-1 is only HS 
capable and only Port-2 is SS Capable, and so in the phy-names only 
port-2 has been provided a SS Phy. Just by parsing through the 
phy-names, it would not be possible to get that info. So if we consider 
num-ss-ports as 2 in this scenario, we end up meddling with wrong 
registers (as there is only 1 GUSB3PIPECTL reg and we are assuing there 
are 2). I wanted to make sure that this scenario was not possible.

num-ss-ports = max_port_index (usb3-portX) + 1
num-ports = max (max_port_index(usb2-portX), max_port_index(usb2-portX)) + 1

Taking case of a quad port controller with all ports SS Capable, if the 
user wants to completely skip port-4. Then with above formula, we get 
(num-ports = 3) and (num-ss-ports = 3) by parsing the phy-names and we 
will configure exactly those dwc3-phy registers and not touch the port-4 
registers which is still fine.

Please let me know if the above idea helps us in this scenario.

Regards,
Krishna,