Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] xhci: Add host support for eUSB2 double isochronous bandwidth devices

[Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>]

Hi Greg,

On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 04:25:05PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 08:53:52AM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > From: "Rai, Amardeep" <amardeep.rai@intel.com>
> > 
> > Detect eUSB2 double isoc bw capable hosts and devices, and set the proper
> > xhci endpoint context values such as 'Mult', 'Max Burst Size', and 'Max
> > ESIT Payload' to enable the double isochronous bandwidth endpoints.
> > 
> > Intel xHC uses the endpoint context 'Mult' field for eUSB2 isoc
> > endpoints even if hosts supporting Large ESIT Payload Capability should
> > normally ignore the mult field.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rai, Amardeep <amardeep.rai@intel.com>
> > Co-developed-by: Kannappan R <r.kannappan@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kannappan R <r.kannappan@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
> > Co-developed-by: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>
> > Co-developed-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/usb/host/xhci-caps.h |  2 ++
> >  drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c  | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >  drivers/usb/host/xhci-ring.c |  6 ++--
> >  drivers/usb/host/xhci.c      | 16 +++++++++-
> >  drivers/usb/host/xhci.h      | 19 ++++++++++++
> >  5 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-caps.h b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-caps.h
> > index 4b8ff4815644..723a56052439 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-caps.h
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-caps.h
> > @@ -89,3 +89,5 @@
> >  #define HCC2_GSC(p)             ((p) & (1 << 8))
> >  /* true: HC support Virtualization Based Trusted I/O Capability */
> >  #define HCC2_VTC(p)             ((p) & (1 << 9))
> > +/* true: HC support Double BW on a eUSB2 HS ISOC EP */
> > +#define HCC2_EUSB2_DIC(p)	((p) & (1 << 11))
> 
> Why tabs when the ones above it were not using tabs?

I'll use spaces for v4 so the macro bodies are aligned.

These macros should be cleaned up but that's for another set I think.

-- 
Regards,

Sakari Ailus