Re: [PATCH v11 08/14] usb: otg: add OTG/dual-role core
From: Peter Chen <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-22 03:40:38
Also in:
linux-omap, lkml
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 05:47:47PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
Hi, Peter Chen [off-list ref] writes:quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ * @otg_dev: OTG controller device, if needs to be used with OTG core.do you really know of any platform which has a separate OTG controller?Andrew had pointed out in [1] that Tegra210 has separate blocks for OTG, host and gadget. [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.tegra/22969that's not an OTG controller, it's just a mux. No different than Intel's mux for swapping between XHCI and peripheral-only DWC3. frankly, I would NEVER talk about OTG when type-C comes into play. They are two competing standards and, apparently, type-C is winning when it comes to role-swapping.In fact, OTG is mis-used by people. Currently, if the port is dual-role, It will be considered as an OTG port.That's because "dual-role" is a non-standard OTG. Seen as people really didn't care about OTG, we (linux-usb folks) ended up naturally referring to "non-standard OTG" as "dual-role". Just to avoid confusion.So, unless we use OTG FSM defined in OTG spec, we should not mention "OTG" in Linux, right?to avoid confusion with the terminology, yes. With that settled, let's figure out how you can deliver what your marketting guys are asking of you.Since nxp SoC claims they are OTG compliance, we need to pass usb.org test. The internal bsp has passed PET test, and formal compliance test is on the way (should pass too). The dual-role and OTG compliance use the same zImage, but different dtb.okay, that's good to know. Now, the question really is: considering we only have one user for this generic OTG FSM layer, do we really need to make it generic at all? I mean, just look at how invasive a change that is.If the chipidea is the only user for this roger's framework, I don't think it is necessary. In fact, Roger introduces this framework, and the first user is dwc3, we think it can be used for others. Let'sRight, we need to look at the history of dwc3 to figure out why the conclusion that dwc3 needs this was made. Roger started working on this framework when Power on Reset section of databook had some details which weren't always clear and, for safety, we always had reset asserted for a really long time. It was so long (about 400 ms) that resetting dwc3 for each role swap was just too much. Coupled with that, the OTG chapter wasn't very clear either on expections from Host and Peripheral side initialization in OTG/DRD systems. More recent version of dwc3 databook have a much better description of how and which reset bits _must_ be asserted and which shouldn't be touched unless it's for debugging purposes. When I implemented that, our ->probe() went from 400ms down to about 50us. Coupled with that, the OTG chapter also became a lot clearer to the point that it states you just don't initialize anything other than the OTG block, and just wait for OTG interrupt to do whatever it is you need to do. This meant that we could actually afford to do full reinitialization of dwc3 on role swap (it's now only 50us anyway) and we knew how to swap roles properly. (The reason for needing soft-reset during role swap is kinda long. But in summary dwc3 shadows register writes to both host and peripheral sides)quoted
just discuss if it is necessary for dual-role switch.fair. However, if we have a single user we don't have a Generic layer. There's not enough variance to come up with truly generic architecture for this. --
I have put some points in my last reply [1], I summery it here to see if a generic framework is deserved or not? 1. If there are some parts we can use during the role switch - The common start/stop host and peripheral operation eg, when switch from host to peripheral, all drivers can use usb_remove_hcd to finish it. - A common workqueue to handle vbus and id event - sysfs for role switch 2. Does a mux driver can do it well? Yoshihiro, here we need your point. The main point is if we need to call USB API to change roles (eg, usb_remove_hcd) during the role switch, thanks. [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg142974.html -- Best Regards, Peter Chen -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html