From: Lukasz Majewski <lukma@denx.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/7] usb: rockchip: fix command failed on host side due to missing data
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 23:24:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180703232434.69c85aa0@jawa> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1530644652-12537-2-git-send-email-alberto@amarulasolutions.com>
Hi Alberto,
> Two consecutive rockusb_tx_write without waiting for request complete
> do results in transfer reset of first request and thus no or
> incomplete data transfer. This because rockusb_tx_write do use just
> une request to keep serialization.
>
> So calls like:
> rockusb_tx_write_str(emmc_id);
> rockusb_tx_write_csw(cbw->tag, cbw->data_transfer_length, CSW_GOOD);
>
> was succeeding only when DEBUG was defined because the time spent
> printing debug info was enough for request to complete.
Serialization by printf.....
>
> This patch add a way to postpone sending csw after first
> rockusb_tx_write is completed (indeed inside rockusb_complete) fixing
> execution of: $ rkdeveloptool rfi
> when DEBUG is not defined.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alberto Panizzo <alberto@amarulasolutions.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/f_rockusb.h | 1 +
> drivers/usb/gadget/f_rockusb.c | 37
> ++++++++++++++++++++++---- 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 5
> deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/f_rockusb.h
> b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/f_rockusb.h index
> 0b62771..f5cad8e 100644 ---
> a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/f_rockusb.h +++
> b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/f_rockusb.h @@ -124,6 +124,7 @@
> struct f_rockusb { int reboot_flag;
> void *buf;
> void *buf_head;
> + struct bulk_cs_wrap *next_csw;
> };
>
> /* init rockusb device, tell rockusb which device you want to
> read/write*/ diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/f_rockusb.c
> b/drivers/usb/gadget/f_rockusb.c index b8833d0..a39ad51 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/f_rockusb.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/f_rockusb.c
> @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ static struct usb_gadget_strings *rkusb_strings[] =
> {
> static struct f_rockusb *rockusb_func;
> static void rx_handler_command(struct usb_ep *ep, struct usb_request
> *req); +static int rockusb_tx_write(const char *buffer, unsigned int
> buffer_size); static int rockusb_tx_write_csw(u32 tag, int residue,
> u8 status, int size);
> struct f_rockusb *get_rkusb(void)
> @@ -136,11 +137,22 @@ struct usb_endpoint_descriptor *hs)
>
> static void rockusb_complete(struct usb_ep *ep, struct usb_request
> *req) {
> + struct f_rockusb *f_rkusb = get_rkusb();
> int status = req->status;
>
> - if (!status)
> - return;
> - debug("status: %d ep '%s' trans: %d\n", status, ep->name,
> req->actual);
> + if (status)
> + debug("status: %d ep '%s' trans: %d\n",
> + status, ep->name, req->actual);
> +
> + /* Send Command Status on previous transfer complete */
> + if (f_rkusb->next_csw) {
^^^^^^^^ - isn't this a bit misleading? We send
the status for the previous transfer.
> +#ifdef DEBUG
> + printcsw((char *)f_rkusb->next_csw);
> +#endif
> + rockusb_tx_write((char *)f_rkusb->next_csw,
> + USB_BULK_CS_WRAP_LEN);
> + }
> + f_rkusb->next_csw = NULL;
> }
>
> /* config the rockusb device*/
> @@ -388,6 +400,21 @@ static int rockusb_tx_write_csw(u32 tag, int
> residue, u8 status, int size) return rockusb_tx_write((char *)csw,
> size); }
>
> +struct bulk_cs_wrap g_next_csw;
You have added the pointer to struct bulk_cs_wrap_g to struct
f_rockusb, and here we do have global definition.
Two issues with cache; alignment and padding.
Maybe it would be better to allocate it and store pointer int struct
f_rockusb ?
> +static void rockusb_tx_write_csw_on_complete(u32 tag, int residue,
> u8 status) +{
> + struct f_rockusb *f_rkusb = get_rkusb();
> +
> + g_next_csw.signature = cpu_to_le32(USB_BULK_CS_SIG);
> + g_next_csw.tag = tag;
> + g_next_csw.residue = cpu_to_be32(residue);
> + g_next_csw.status = status;
> +#ifdef DEBUG
> + printcsw((char *)&g_next_csw);
> +#endif
> + f_rkusb->next_csw = &g_next_csw;
> +}
> +
> static unsigned int rx_bytes_expected(struct usb_ep *ep)
> {
> struct f_rockusb *f_rkusb = get_rkusb();
> @@ -501,8 +528,8 @@ static void cb_read_storage_id(struct usb_ep *ep,
> struct usb_request *req) printf("read storage id\n");
> memcpy((char *)cbw, req->buf, USB_BULK_CB_WRAP_LEN);
> rockusb_tx_write_str(emmc_id);
> - rockusb_tx_write_csw(cbw->tag, cbw->data_transfer_length,
> CSW_GOOD,
> - USB_BULK_CS_WRAP_LEN);
> + rockusb_tx_write_csw_on_complete(cbw->tag,
> cbw->data_transfer_length,
> + CSW_GOOD);
It seems like you are preparing the content of the csw structure to be
ready when the completion is called. Am I right?
What I'm concerned about - with your patch we do have two functions
with almost the same code - namely rockusb_tx_write_csw() and
rockusb_tx_write_csw_on_complete().
Would it be possible to unify (reuse) the code?
One more remark - shouldn't we set content of g_next_csw in the
rockusb_complete() ?
> }
>
> static void cb_write_lba(struct usb_ep *ep, struct usb_request *req)
Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20180703/ad42e197/attachment.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-03 21:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-03 19:02 [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/7] Improve rockusb support in U-Boot Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 19:02 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/7] usb: rockchip: fix command failed on host side due to missing data Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 21:24 ` Lukasz Majewski [this message]
2018-07-04 10:11 ` Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 19:02 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] usb: rockchip: implement skeleton for K_FW_GET_CHIP_VER command Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 21:33 ` Lukasz Majewski
2018-07-04 13:27 ` Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 19:02 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/7] rockchip: rk3288: implement reading chip version from bootrom code Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 19:02 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/7] usb: rockchip: implement K_FW_LBA_READ_10 command Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 21:42 ` Lukasz Majewski
2018-07-04 13:36 ` Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-05 1:19 ` Kever Yang
2018-07-05 8:52 ` Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 19:02 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 5/7] usb: rockchip: implement K_FW_LBA_ERASE_10 command Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 21:47 ` Lukasz Majewski
2018-07-03 19:02 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 6/7] usb: rockchip: be quiet on serial port while transferring data Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 21:49 ` Lukasz Majewski
2018-07-04 13:44 ` Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-03 19:02 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 7/7] usb: rockchip: boost up write speed from 4MB/s to 15MB/s Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-05 1:15 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/7] Improve rockusb support in U-Boot Kever Yang
2018-07-05 8:39 ` Alberto Panizzo
2018-07-05 9:07 ` Lukasz Majewski
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=20180703232434.69c85aa0@jawa \
--to=lukma@denx.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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