From: Prashanth K <quic_prashk@quicinc.com>
To: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: Fix latency of DSTS while receiving wakeup event
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2024 15:11:13 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ec99fcdc-9404-8cd9-6a30-95e4f5c1edcd@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240806235142.cem5f635wmds4bt4@synopsys.com>
On 07-08-24 05:21 am, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2024, Prashanth K wrote:
>> When operating in High-Speed, it is observed that DSTS[USBLNKST] doesn't
>> update link state immediately after receiving the wakeup interrupt. Since
>> wakeup event handler calls the resume callbacks, there is a chance that
>> function drivers can perform an ep queue. Which in turn tries to perform
>> remote wakeup from send_gadget_ep_cmd(), this happens because DSTS[[21:18]
>> wasn't updated to U0 yet. It is observed that the latency of DSTS can be
>> in order of milli-seconds. Hence update the dwc->link_state from evtinfo,
>> and use this variable to prevent calling remote wakup unnecessarily.
>>
>> Fixes: ecba9bc9946b ("usb: dwc3: gadget: Check for L1/L2/U3 for Start Transfer")
>
> This commit ID is corrupted. Please check.
>
Will fix it, was supposed to be 63c4c320ccf7, thanks for pointing out.
> While operating in usb2 speed, if the device is in low power link state
> (L1/L2), CMDACT may not complete and time out. The programming guide
> suggested to initiate remote wakeup to bring the device to ON state,
> allowing the command to go through. However, clearing the
Yea true, we need ensure that the linkstate is not in L1/L2/U3 for
HS/SS. But since we are relying on DSTS for this, we may issue
remote-wakeup to host even when not needed. During host initiated wakeup
scenario, we get a wakeup interrupt which calls function driver resume
calls. If function driver queues something, then startxfer has to be
issued, but DSTS was still showing U3 instead of U0. When checked with
our design team, they mentioned the latency in DSTS is expected since
and latency would be in msec order from Resume to U0. Can you please
confirm this once, I simply added a polling mechanism in wakeup handler.
@@ -4175,6 +4177,14 @@ static void dwc3_gadget_wakeup_interrupt(struct
dwc3 *dwc, unsigned int evtinfo)
* TODO take core out of low power mode when that's
* implemented.
*/
+ while (retries++ < 20000) {
+ reg = dwc3_readl(dwc->regs, DWC3_DSTS);
+ /* in HS, means ON */
+ if (DWC3_DSTS_USBLNKST(reg) == DWC3_LINK_STATE_U0)
+ break;
+ udelay(2);
+ }
+ pr_info("DWC3 Wakeup: %d", retries);
And turns out, retries 1500 to 15000 (worst case), which can range from
3ms to 30ms. By this time, control can reach startXfer, where it tries
to perform remote-wakeup even if host just resumed the gadget.
For SS case, this retries count was consistently 1, it was passing in
first try itself. But unfortunately doesn't behave the same way in HS.
> GUSB2PHYCFG.suspendusb2 turns on the signal required to complete a
> command within 50us. This happens within the timeout required for an
> endpoint command. As a result, there's no need to perform remote wakeup.
>
> For usb3 speed, if it's in U3, the gadget is in suspend anyway. There
> will be no ep_queue to trigger the Start Transfer command.
>
> You can just remove the whole Start Transfer check for remote wakeup
> completely.
>
Sorry, i didnt understand your suggestion. The startxfer check is needed
as per databook, but we also need to handle the latency seen in DSTS
when operating in HS.
Thanks,
Prashanth K
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-07 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-30 12:47 [PATCH] usb: dwc3: Fix latency of DSTS while receiving wakeup event Prashanth K
2024-08-06 23:51 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-08-07 9:41 ` Prashanth K [this message]
2024-08-08 0:06 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-08-13 9:53 ` Prashanth K
2024-08-13 23:30 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-08-14 4:22 ` Prashanth K
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=ec99fcdc-9404-8cd9-6a30-95e4f5c1edcd@quicinc.com \
--to=quic_prashk@quicinc.com \
--cc=Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@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