Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp1167957pxj; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 07:40:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzJ76NZBm/oosP/IR3x0szZBjpQKC6UyBGMLPO6QGp6k3FO93cLYGzLNnSbWIECg4TqT/cu X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:1b02:: with SMTP id mp2mr4425401ejc.196.1622817619569; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 07:40:19 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1622817619; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=OuB43IGFF8m1YA+ZLFDttIdJDu38S8ZnkrPU1MkqbRNKWMiDy5BSESCqPdZOS5pd8v 4j6xvr50bMxcsliIG6Zf/pV/Aejs/V5eLHMeey7UYnoQJHObZkd06N+JoxQn1yNMFYci 9TZcZjOR3zNJBeHL8fFfx2EUvV/qzTCRmcWHj0ExTAR+yiJYUS+WaUWIi4An4SqZVHb2 gVtoz0RBgSwVTotgvE7aYwFSGEDCBWoD6SbOs19zNWTm5TS8xCkbPlKQU2+06Gmlb7Zz l9UYBXSH57Xj9UfQeug20Ym6RUeGs2hRoQ8NRnTWkDBG5OTgBDMHFAP7GnDLR/rZhJgx WF9A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=miP7WSBA2BPBQKlJSD3qODML8hJcTgQvewZA1jsU7RE=; b=uQQc+jp2Cw02vMZ0qBGWH3GtAi1wicx8DzpRyPAVgYJKcnNOzAdze+pnLnMRTpWZOF CVgbSr+D9fjLgYSvVC7Q++P7kh9z+vsfbix+hQM5xY2YSajvv0oIKDzmeD//teOou0ZS Fv75FwSieFtzZjumD6PVHj/0Cv+6iRHu9IuMcG6pTdbW0HEoFg9LvQcWdrLUjA2BbXLW +riYDSqXpqzOsHBvHod9/7gvqVyX/EW72pRW8Q7NkTih2rwYWgtj13cVQTBbWgDdICEi h/KU8Cx1tk/wtjyKOoV9a4e00vwKgtqztSdzNF2JEdrTYVDZ0x4o+B8QxfyHy5CMGlkP Uh1Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.s=korg header.b=dwRkfSKL; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id i23si4804574ejo.352.2021.06.04.07.39.53; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 07:40:19 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.s=korg header.b=dwRkfSKL; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229726AbhFDOiA (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 4 Jun 2021 10:38:00 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:45282 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229667AbhFDOiA (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jun 2021 10:38:00 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 450CE613E9; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 14:36:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1622817373; bh=HwCNaCxyfpmQTZr5tIqLf0mLyNwi684+TYqbc6F7EQY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=dwRkfSKLdoVj8zEJKZD00ctGczPo7L93A4Pc8mu6iKhNUkN65FB0A9bvZyqbJqSyg BfsrianZHpbfzJ3xMC+sMc0xlbjG7DdPe7laCVrvFVcpdOAqttseAPNwfZNeSWE4Ev gYVqX8N+BxoRJmNADNLO7LdTFU/S87LXFEDVtXZs= Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 16:36:11 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Felipe Balbi Cc: Wesley Cheng , agross@kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, jackp@codeaurora.org, Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/5] Re-introduce TX FIFO resize for larger EP bursting Message-ID: References: <1621410561-32762-1-git-send-email-wcheng@codeaurora.org> <87k0n9btnb.fsf@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87k0n9btnb.fsf@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 05:18:16PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > Hi, > > Greg KH writes: > > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:49:16AM -0700, Wesley Cheng wrote: > >> Changes in V9: > >> - Fixed incorrect patch in series. Removed changes in DTSI, as dwc3-qcom will > >> add the property by default from the kernel. > > > > This patch series has one build failure and one warning added: > > > > drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c: In function ‘dwc3_gadget_calc_tx_fifo_size’: > > drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c:653:45: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘dwc3_mdwidth’ makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion] > > 653 | mdwidth = dwc3_mdwidth(dwc->hwparams.hwparams0); > > | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~ > > | | > > | u32 {aka unsigned int} > > In file included from drivers/usb/dwc3/debug.h:14, > > from drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c:25: > > drivers/usb/dwc3/core.h:1493:45: note: expected ‘struct dwc3 *’ but argument is of type ‘u32’ {aka ‘unsigned int’} > > 1493 | static inline u32 dwc3_mdwidth(struct dwc3 *dwc) > > | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~ > > > > > > drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-qcom.c: In function ‘dwc3_qcom_of_register_core’: > > drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-qcom.c:660:23: error: implicit declaration of function ‘of_add_property’; did you mean ‘of_get_property’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > 660 | ret = of_add_property(dwc3_np, prop); > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > | of_get_property > > > > > > How did you test these? > > to be honest, I don't think these should go in (apart from the build > failure) because it's likely to break instantiations of the core with > differing FIFO sizes. Some instantiations even have some endpoints with > dedicated functionality that requires the default FIFO size configured > during coreConsultant instantiation. I know of at OMAP5 and some Intel > implementations which have dedicated endpoints for processor tracing. > > With OMAP5, these endpoints are configured at the top of the available > endpoints, which means that if a gadget driver gets loaded and takes > over most of the FIFO space because of this resizing, processor tracing > will have a hard time running. That being said, processor tracing isn't > supported in upstream at this moment. > > I still think this may cause other places to break down. The promise the > databook makes is that increasing the FIFO size over 2x wMaxPacketSize > should bring little to no benefit, if we're not maintaining that, I > wonder if the problem is with some of the BUSCFG registers instead, > where we configure interconnect bursting and the like. Good points. Wesley, what kind of testing have you done on this on different devices? thanks, greg k-h