The ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend() sets ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED when
suspend which will let the ohci_irq() skip the interrupt after resume. And
nobody to handle this interrupt.
Set the ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND instead of OHCI_RH_HALTED when
suspend to fix it.
Signed-off-by: Guiting Shen <[email protected]>
---
drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
index b9ce8d80f20b..7a970e573668 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
@@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend(struct device *dev)
* REVISIT: some boards will be able to turn VBUS off...
*/
if (!ohci_at91->wakeup) {
- ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_HALTED;
+ ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_SUSPENDED;
/* flush the writes */
(void) ohci_readl (ohci, &ohci->regs->control);
--
2.25.1
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 10:57:39AM +0800, Guiting Shen wrote:
> The ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend() sets ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED when
> suspend which will let the ohci_irq() skip the interrupt after resume. And
> nobody to handle this interrupt.
>
> Set the ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND instead of OHCI_RH_HALTED when
> suspend to fix it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Guiting Shen <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
> index b9ce8d80f20b..7a970e573668 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
> @@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend(struct device *dev)
> * REVISIT: some boards will be able to turn VBUS off...
> */
> if (!ohci_at91->wakeup) {
> - ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_HALTED;
> + ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_SUSPENDED;
It looks like this change ignores the comment immediately above it
(just before the start of this hunk).
If you want to find a way to handle IRQs better after the controller
resumes, maybe you should change the resume routine instead of the
suspend routine.
Alan Stern
On Thu,Jun 22,2023 at 22:29:43PM GMT+8, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 10:57:39AM +0800, Guiting Shen wrote:
>> The ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend() sets ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED when
>> suspend which will let the ohci_irq() skip the interrupt after resume. And
>> nobody to handle this interrupt.
>>
>> Set the ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND instead of OHCI_RH_HALTED when
>> suspend to fix it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Guiting Shen <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
>> index b9ce8d80f20b..7a970e573668 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
>> @@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend(struct device *dev)
>> * REVISIT: some boards will be able to turn VBUS off...
>> */
>> if (!ohci_at91->wakeup) {
>> - ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_HALTED;
>> + ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_SUSPENDED;
>
> It looks like this change ignores the comment immediately above it
> (just before the start of this hunk).
>
> If you want to find a way to handle IRQs better after the controller
> resumes, maybe you should change the resume routine instead of the
> suspend routine.
>
> Alan Stern
The comment which was added with commit-id 0365ee0a8f745 may be outdated
because ohci_suspend() and ohci_at91_port_suspend() is used to suspend
instead of setting ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED.
What's more, I found that only ohci-at91 driver to set the
ohci->rh_state which may be unnessory because the ohci_suspend() disable
irq emission and mark HW unaccessible and ohci_at91_port_suspend()
suspend the controller.
Is it really need to set ohci->rh_state in ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend()?
It maybe confused to set ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND in resume
routine.
--
Best regards,
Guiting Shen
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 11:44:04AM +0800, Guiting Shen wrote:
>
>
> On Thu,Jun 22,2023 at 22:29:43PM GMT+8, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 10:57:39AM +0800, Guiting Shen wrote:
> > > The ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend() sets ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED when
> > > suspend which will let the ohci_irq() skip the interrupt after resume. And
> > > nobody to handle this interrupt.
> > >
> > > Set the ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND instead of OHCI_RH_HALTED when
> > > suspend to fix it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Guiting Shen <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
> > > index b9ce8d80f20b..7a970e573668 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
> > > @@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend(struct device *dev)
> > > * REVISIT: some boards will be able to turn VBUS off...
> > > */
> > > if (!ohci_at91->wakeup) {
> > > - ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_HALTED;
> > > + ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_SUSPENDED;
> >
> > It looks like this change ignores the comment immediately above it
> > (just before the start of this hunk).
> >
> > If you want to find a way to handle IRQs better after the controller
> > resumes, maybe you should change the resume routine instead of the
> > suspend routine.
> >
> > Alan Stern
>
> The comment which was added with commit-id 0365ee0a8f745 may be outdated
> because ohci_suspend() and ohci_at91_port_suspend() is used to suspend
> instead of setting ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED.
The comment says nothing about ohci->rh_state; it talks about the
integrated transceivers and the 48 MHz clock. I don't see why you would
think the comment is outdated.
> What's more, I found that only ohci-at91 driver to set the ohci->rh_state
> which may be unnessory because the ohci_suspend() disable irq emission and
> mark HW unaccessible and ohci_at91_port_suspend() suspend the controller.
>
> Is it really need to set ohci->rh_state in ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend()?
>
> It maybe confused to set ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND in resume
> routine.
I'm not really sure what that assignment was intended to accomplish, but
maybe it was meant to force a reset when the controller resumes.
You could get the same result by leaving ohci->rh_state set to
OHCI_RH_SUSPENDED but changing ohci_hcd_at91_drv_resume(). Instead of
calling ohci_resume(hcd, false), have it call:
ohci_resume(hcd, !ohci_at91->wakeup);
That way, if the wakeup flag is clear and the clock was stopped,
ohci_resume() will call ohci_usb_reset(). You should also add a comment
explaining the reason.
I can't test this because I don't have the AT91 hardware.
Alan Stern
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 23:52:53PM GMT+8, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 11:44:04AM +0800, Guiting Shen wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu,Jun 22,2023 at 22:29:43PM GMT+8, Alan Stern wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 10:57:39AM +0800, Guiting Shen wrote:
>>>> The ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend() sets ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED when
>>>> suspend which will let the ohci_irq() skip the interrupt after resume. And
>>>> nobody to handle this interrupt.
>>>>
>>>> Set the ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND instead of OHCI_RH_HALTED when
>>>> suspend to fix it.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Guiting Shen <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c | 2 +-
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
>>>> index b9ce8d80f20b..7a970e573668 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-at91.c
>>>> @@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>>> * REVISIT: some boards will be able to turn VBUS off...
>>>> */
>>>> if (!ohci_at91->wakeup) {
>>>> - ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_HALTED;
>>>> + ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_SUSPENDED;
>>>
>>> It looks like this change ignores the comment immediately above it
>>> (just before the start of this hunk).
>>>
>>> If you want to find a way to handle IRQs better after the controller
>>> resumes, maybe you should change the resume routine instead of the
>>> suspend routine.
>>>
>>> Alan Stern
>>
>> The comment which was added with commit-id 0365ee0a8f745 may be outdated
>> because ohci_suspend() and ohci_at91_port_suspend() is used to suspend
>> instead of setting ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED.
>
> The comment says nothing about ohci->rh_state; it talks about the
> integrated transceivers and the 48 MHz clock. I don't see why you would
> think the comment is outdated.
>
The comment says the reason to discard connection state by reset, but I
don't see any reset operation at ohci-at91 suspend/resume routine in
source code.And ohci_suspend() disable irq emission and mark HW
unaccessible maybe do the same effect as set ohci->rh_state to
OHCI_RH_HALTED to discard connection state which I think the comment is
outdated.
>> What's more, I found that only ohci-at91 driver to set the ohci->rh_state
>> which may be unnessory because the ohci_suspend() disable irq emission and
>> mark HW unaccessible and ohci_at91_port_suspend() suspend the controller.
>>
>> Is it really need to set ohci->rh_state in ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend()?
>>
>> It maybe confused to set ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND in resume
>> routine.
>
> I'm not really sure what that assignment was intended to accomplish, but
> maybe it was meant to force a reset when the controller resumes.
>
> You could get the same result by leaving ohci->rh_state set to
> OHCI_RH_SUSPENDED but changing ohci_hcd_at91_drv_resume(). Instead of
> calling ohci_resume(hcd, false), have it call:
>
> ohci_resume(hcd, !ohci_at91->wakeup);
>
> That way, if the wakeup flag is clear and the clock was stopped,
> ohci_resume() will call ohci_usb_reset(). You should also add a comment
> explaining the reason.
>
> I can't test this because I don't have the AT91 hardware.
>
It works by your methods to force a reset in my sama5d3 soc hardware.
And I found that the ohci->rh_state was already OHCI_RH_SUSPEND before
set it OHCI_RH_HALTED in suspend.So the question is whether to set it
OHCI_RH_HALETED in ohci-at91 suspend routine.
It also works by comment the ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_HALTED in suspend
routine.But I think it is safer to use your methods.
Do you have any suggestion on it before I send v2 patch latter.
--
Regards,
Guiting Shen
On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 12:01:12PM +0800, Guiting Shen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 23:52:53PM GMT+8, Alan Stern wrote:
> >> The comment which was added with commit-id 0365ee0a8f745 may be outdated
> >> because ohci_suspend() and ohci_at91_port_suspend() is used to suspend
> >> instead of setting ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_HALTED.
> >
> > The comment says nothing about ohci->rh_state; it talks about the
> > integrated transceivers and the 48 MHz clock. I don't see why you would
> > think the comment is outdated.
> >
>
> The comment says the reason to discard connection state by reset, but I
> don't see any reset operation at ohci-at91 suspend/resume routine in
> source code.And ohci_suspend() disable irq emission and mark HW
> unaccessible maybe do the same effect as set ohci->rh_state to
> OHCI_RH_HALTED to discard connection state which I think the comment is
> outdated.
No, it doesn't do the same. An actual reset is needed.
> >> What's more, I found that only ohci-at91 driver to set the ohci->rh_state
> >> which may be unnessory because the ohci_suspend() disable irq emission and
> >> mark HW unaccessible and ohci_at91_port_suspend() suspend the controller.
> >>
> >> Is it really need to set ohci->rh_state in ohci_hcd_at91_drv_suspend()?
> >>
> >> It maybe confused to set ohci->rh_state to OHCI_RH_SUSPEND in resume
> >> routine.
> >
> > I'm not really sure what that assignment was intended to accomplish, but
> > maybe it was meant to force a reset when the controller resumes.
> >
> > You could get the same result by leaving ohci->rh_state set to
> > OHCI_RH_SUSPENDED but changing ohci_hcd_at91_drv_resume(). Instead of
> > calling ohci_resume(hcd, false), have it call:
> >
> > ohci_resume(hcd, !ohci_at91->wakeup);
> >
> > That way, if the wakeup flag is clear and the clock was stopped,
> > ohci_resume() will call ohci_usb_reset(). You should also add a comment
> > explaining the reason.
> >
> > I can't test this because I don't have the AT91 hardware.
> >
>
> It works by your methods to force a reset in my sama5d3 soc hardware.
> And I found that the ohci->rh_state was already OHCI_RH_SUSPEND before
> set it OHCI_RH_HALTED in suspend.So the question is whether to set it
> OHCI_RH_HALETED in ohci-at91 suspend routine.
>
> It also works by comment the ohci->rh_state = OHCI_RH_HALTED in suspend
> routine.But I think it is safer to use your methods.
>
> Do you have any suggestion on it before I send v2 patch latter.
No suggestions now. Submit your v2 patch and then maybe I'll have
something more to say.
Alan Stern