From: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>
To: Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@quicinc.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@intel.com>,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
quic_ugoswami@quicinc.com, Jung Daehwan <dh10.jung@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xhci: reduce xhci_handshake timeout in xhci_reset
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 12:16:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1b9e7641-2ae9-0f81-2ad9-18340d5e148f@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220214135310.GC31021@hu-pkondeti-hyd.qualcomm.com>
On 14.2.2022 15.53, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 02:51:54PM +0200, Mathias Nyman wrote:
>> On 14.2.2022 14.20, Pavankumar Kondeti wrote:
>>> From: Daehwan Jung <dh10.jung@samsung.com>
>>>
>>> xhci_reset() is called with interrupts disabled. Waiting 10 seconds for
>>> controller reset and controller ready operations can be fatal to the
>>> system when controller is timed out. Reduce the timeout to 1 second
>>> and print a error message when the time out happens.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 22ceac191211 ("xhci: Increase reset timeout for Renesas 720201 host.")
>>
>>
>> The commit 22ceac191211 ("xhci: Increase reset timeout for Renesas 720201 host.")
>> intentionally increased the timeout to 10 seconds as that host might take 9
>> seconds to complete reset. This was done almost 10 years ago so I don't know
>> if it really is an issue anymore.
>>
>> Anyways, your patch might break Renesas 72021 instead of fixing it.
>
> Unfortunately, yes :-( . We have this reduced timeout patch in our previous
> commercialized products so thought this would be a good time to fix this
> once for all. Since this patch has been 10 years long, not sure if any other
> controllers also need 10 sec timeout. It would probably better
>
>>
>> I agree that busylooping up to 10 seconds with interrupts disabled doesn't make sense.
>>
>> Lets see if there is another solution for your case.
>>
>> - Does a "guard interval" after writing the reset help?
>> For example Intel xHCI needs 1ms before touching xHC after writing the reset bit
>
> I will ask this question to our hardware team. Setting that one quirk from
> DWC3 host might require other changes like this [1].
>>
>> - Is it the CNR bit or the RESET bit that fails? could be just stuck CNR bit?
>
> The RESET bit never gets cleared from USBCMD register.
>
>>
>> - we only disable local interrupts when xhci_reset() is called from xhci_stop(),
>> and sometimes from xhci_shutdown() and xhci_resume() if some conditions are met.
>> Have you identified which one is the problematic case?
>
> The crash reports I have seen are pointing to
>
> usb_remove_hcd()->xhci_stop()->xhci_reset()
Ok, so xhci_stop() and xhci_shutdown() both may call xhci_reset() with interrupts
disabled and spinlock held. In both these cases we're not that interested in the
outcome of xhci_reset().
But during probe we call xhci_reset() with interrupts enabled without spinlock,
and here we really care about it succeeding.
I'm also guessing reset could take a longer time during probe due to possible recent
BIOS handover, or firmware loading etc.
So how about passing a timeout value to xhci_reset()?
Give it 10 seconds during probe, and 250ms in the other cases.
Then dig into the reason why xhci_stop(), xhci_resume() and xhci_shutdown() call
xhci_reset() witch spin_lock_irq() held.
-Mathias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-15 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-14 11:04 [PATCH] xhci: reduce xhci_handshake timeout in xhci_reset Pavankumar Kondeti
2022-02-14 11:36 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-02-14 12:17 ` Pavan Kondeti
2022-02-14 12:20 ` [PATCH v2] " Pavankumar Kondeti
2022-02-14 12:29 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-02-14 13:19 ` Pavan Kondeti
2022-02-14 12:51 ` Mathias Nyman
2022-02-14 13:53 ` Pavan Kondeti
2022-02-15 8:51 ` Jung Daehwan
2022-02-15 9:43 ` Oliver Neukum
2022-02-15 10:16 ` Mathias Nyman [this message]
2022-02-15 10:49 ` Pavan Kondeti
2022-02-15 17:07 ` Pavan Kondeti
2022-02-16 15:58 ` Mathias Nyman
2022-02-16 16:44 ` Sergey Shtylyov
2022-02-17 3:03 ` Pavan Kondeti
2022-02-14 15:45 ` [PATCH] " Sergei Shtylyov
2022-02-15 3:38 ` Pavan Kondeti
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=1b9e7641-2ae9-0f81-2ad9-18340d5e148f@linux.intel.com \
--to=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dh10.jung@samsung.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathias.nyman@intel.com \
--cc=quic_pkondeti@quicinc.com \
--cc=quic_ugoswami@quicinc.com \
/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