Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1599060933-8092-1-git-send-email-u0084500@gmail.com>
 <20200902165713.GG56237@roeck-us.net> <CADiBU3_iHk4aoM8o6GcaTmWDZT4ymvb0Ff-XeLLZ0C9dhCnLZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <fd2a33fc-2383-66cb-0fd7-d5aa0cc9111f@roeck-us.net> <CADiBU3_vYAmHDCONrExzyM+1CTfqJx_eS1hYG8aHkNWFzTcwfg@mail.gmail.com>
 <63c7f5e4-eff2-1420-30a5-a0b98a7815e0@roeck-us.net> <CADiBU3-83rVLqhVAqqSGc0qQ66PHsGVVcp_m3sm_4ZS5A+GXKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADiBU3_c5O-yUac-ytp5WoQQ12edkU+4wn+WNBOVGRGM15NBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201002133145.GA3384841@kroah.com> <c2d689eb-5538-6af2-614f-766521100273@roeck-us.net>
 <20201005110808.GA298743@kroah.com> <88586992-650f-a4a1-2fa0-8cef313380fb@roeck-us.net>
 <CADiBU38wk825SqtFRAiYqqV47Wwi43AuWKut19qeTbGBZFqPow@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADiBU38wk825SqtFRAiYqqV47Wwi43AuWKut19qeTbGBZFqPow@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Jun Li <lijun.kernel@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Oct 2020 00:52:07 +0800
Message-ID: <CAKgpwJWwyvUyVj+jQ0y2i_eK1XEN2g3NvR0zgrRLfcmtgn8DDg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: tcpm: Fix if vbus before cc, hard_reset_count
 not reset issue
To:     ChiYuan Huang <u0084500@gmail.com>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
        Linux USB List <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        cy_huang <cy_huang@richtek.com>, Li Jun <jun.li@nxp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

ChiYuan Huang <u0084500@gmail.com> =E4=BA=8E2020=E5=B9=B410=E6=9C=886=E6=97=
=A5=E5=91=A8=E4=BA=8C =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=8812:38=E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
>
> Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> =E6=96=BC 2020=E5=B9=B410=E6=9C=885=E6=
=97=A5 =E9=80=B1=E4=B8=80 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=8811:30=E5=AF=AB=E9=81=93=EF=BC=
=9A
> >
> > On 10/5/20 4:08 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > [ ... ]
> > >>> What ever happened with this patch, is there still disagreement?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Yes, there is. I wouldn't have added the conditional without reason,
> > >> and I am concerned that removing it entirely will open another probl=
em.
> > >> Feel free to apply, though - I can't prove that my concern is valid,
> > >> and after all we'll get reports from the field later if it is.
> > >
> > > Ok, can I get an ack so I know who to come back to in the future if
> > > there are issues?  :)
> > >
> >
> > Not from me, for the reasons I stated. I would be ok with something lik=
e:
> >
> > -       if (tcpm_port_is_disconnected(port))
> > +       if (tcpm_port_is_disconnected(port) ||
> > +           (tcpm_cc_is_open(port->cc1) && tcpm_cc_is_open(port->cc2)))
> >
> > to narrow down the condition.
>
> I have tried the above comment and It doesn't work.
> How about to change the judgement like as below
>
> -       if (tcpm_port_is_disconnected(port))
> +       if (tcpm_port_is_disconnected(port) || !port->vbus_present)
>
> The hard_reset_count not reset issue is following by the below order
> 1. VBUS off ( at the same time, cc is still detected as attached)
> port->attached become false and cc is not open
> 2. After that, cc detached.
> due to port->attached is false, tcpm_detach() directly return.

If tcpm_detach() return directly, then how your patch can reset
hard_reset_count?

I am seeing the same issue on my platform, the proposed change:
-       if (tcpm_port_is_disconnected(port))
-               port->hard_reset_count =3D 0;
+       port->hard_reset_count =3D 0;
can't resolve it on my platform.

How about reset hard_reset_count in SNK_READY?
@@ -3325,6 +3329,7 @@ static void run_state_machine(struct tcpm_port *port)
        case SNK_READY:
                port->try_snk_count =3D 0;
                port->update_sink_caps =3D false;
+               port->hard_reset_count =3D 0;
                if (port->explicit_contract) {
                        typec_set_pwr_opmode(port->typec_port,
                                             TYPEC_PWR_MODE_PD);

can this resolve your problem?

Li Jun
>
> And that's why hard_reset_count is not reset to 0.
> >
> > Guenter