lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 1/1] usb: xhci: Add Clear_TT_Buffer
From
Date
On 7.5.2019 17.29, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 7 May 2019, Mathias Nyman wrote:
>
>> On 6.5.2019 17.57, Alan Stern wrote:
>>> On Mon, 6 May 2019, Jim Lin wrote:
>>>
>>>> USB 2.0 specification chapter 11.17.5 says "as part of endpoint halt
>>>> processing for full-/low-speed endpoints connected via a TT, the host
>>>> software must use the Clear_TT_Buffer request to the TT to ensure
>>>> that the buffer is not in the busy state".
>>>>
>>>> In our case, a full-speed speaker (ConferenceCam) is behind a high-
>>>> speed hub (ConferenceCam Connect), sometimes once we get STALL on a
>>>> request we may continue to get STALL with the folllowing requests,
>>>> like Set_Interface.
>>>>
>>>> Here we add Clear_TT_Buffer for the following Set_Interface requests
>>>> to get ACK successfully.
>>>>
>>>> Originally usb_hub_clear_tt_buffer uses urb->dev->devnum as device
>>>> address while sending Clear_TT_Buffer command, but this doesn't work
>>>> for XHCI.
>>>
>>> Why doesn't it work for xHCI? Clear-TT-Buffer is part of the USB 2.0
>>> spec; it should work exactly the same for xHCI as for a USB-2.0 host
>>> controller.
>>>
>>> Alan Stern
>>>
>>
>> For other host controllers udev->devnum is the same as the address of the
>> usb device, chosen and set by usb core.
>>
>> With xHC the controller hardware assigns the address, and won't be the same as
>> devnum.
>>
>> The Clear-TT-Buffer request sent to the hub includes the address of the LS/FS
>> child device in wValue field. usb_hub_clear_tt_buffer() uses udev->devnum to set the
>> address wValue. This won't work for devices connected to xHC
>
> I see. Thanks for the explanation; it makes sense now. The patch
> description should explain this too.
>
> Wouldn't it be better to add a field containing the device address to
> struct usb_device? And also export it, either in sysfs or debugfs?
> It seems like the kind of thing that might be important for debugging.
> If we did this then the usb_hub_clear_tt_buffer API wouldn't need to be
> changed.
>

Agree, adding address to struct usb_device sounds better.

-Mathias

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-08 12:18    [W:0.066 / U:10.424 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site