lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH v2 00/13] USB: OTG/DRD Core functionality
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:33:24AM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
> On 22/04/15 05:17, Peter Chen wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:34:01AM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >> On 21/04/15 09:04, Peter Chen wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 20/04/15 06:05, Peter Chen wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 01:41:47PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >>>>>> This is an attempt to centralize OTG/Dual-role functionality in the kernel.
> >>>>>> As of now I've got Dual-role functionality working pretty reliably on
> >>>>>> dra7-evm. xhci side of things for OTG/DRD use are fixed in
> >>>>>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1923161
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Roger,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Currently, there are two main problems for DRD/OTG framework.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - For multi-platform supports, we may define CONFIG_USB_OTG, but the
> >>>>> gadget should not add its otg descriptor to its configuration
> >>>>> descriptors if it does not support one of otg features (SRP/HNP/ADP).
> >>>>> Macpaul Lin's patch set [1] is the right way to do it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Agreed. That check (whether OTG descriptor can be added and which version
> >>>> of it) has to be done at runtime and it must be added only if hardware supports
> >>>> OTG _and_ kernel OTG support is enabled.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Ok, let's put this patch set in mainline first, since your patch set may need some
> >>> information from it.
> >>>
> >>>>> - We are lack of framework to handle OTG (DRD) switch, it is great you
> >>>>> are designing it. The main problem for this framework is how to handle
> >>>>> DRD/OTG FSM unify. My thought is we add two paths for them separate.
> >>>>> For easy, I suggest if the platform supports one of otg features, then
> >>>>> it goes to fully otg fsm, else it goes to simply otg fsm (like your
> >>>>> drd fsm). If you agree with it too, you may not need to add another
> >>>> "dr_mode"
> >>>>> value.
> >>>>
> >>>> It would be nice that way but unfortunately it does't work in all cases.
> >>>> e.g. What if the SoC itself supports all OTG features but the board is not
> >>>> designed for OTG. Or the product designer simply is not interested in full OTG
> >>>> support but just dual-role. So we need some flexibility for the device
> >>>> tree/platform-data to specify that. This is where a new "dr_mode" == "dual-
> >>>> role" is needed.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Since "dr_mode" has been widely used now, if we add a new property for it, we
> >>> need to change all drivers.
> >>>
> >>> Your OTG/DRD framework needs to (partial) use otg fsm, and we will not teach old
> >>> driver to use it since there are some driver related stuffs.
> >>
> >> fair enough. Let's not change dr_mode then and decide based on other parameters.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> SRP/HNP/ADP support can be board level capabilities, and we may consider the
> >>> otg device which does not support otg fsm (hardware finishes fsm). So I suggest
> >>> we have below properties at dts:
> >>>
> >>> - otg-support /* fully otg support */
> >>> - otg-fsm-support /* fully otg fsm support */
> >>
> >> what is the difference between otg-support and otg-fsm-support?
> >
> > Like I mentioned at above, the hardware finishes HNP/SRP which does not
> > use otg fsm code (usb-otg-fsm.c), most of legacy otg platforms (musb?)
> > use this way, for these platforms, only need to set otg-support = 1
>
> So dr_mode = "otg" _and_ otg-support = 1?
>

Yes

> Again wouldn't this involve changes to dts for musb like platforms
> supporting full OTG?
>
> Instead we could add a new field saying otg-fsm-type
> "otg-hw", "otg-sw", "drd-sw"
>
> If the field is absent it defaults to "otg-hw".
> This also means we don't need otg-fsm-support flag.
>

Yes, that's we doesn't need to change for old platforms, but
we keep our default value as small possibilities, most of current
platforms are only drd platform, it is hard choice.

My original thought was nothing need to add at dts for drd device.

> Now the pseudo-code to decide fsm is
>
> if (dr_mode == "otg" && CONFIG_USB_OTG)
> if (otg-fsm-type == "otg-sw") {
> if (CONFIG_USB_OTG_FSM)
> full otg fsm support via sw
> else
> error "CONFIG_USB_OTG_FSM" not set
> } else if (otg-fsm-type == "drd-sw") {
> dual role fsm support
> } else {
> full otg support via hw
> }
>
> if (otg-fsm-type == "otg
> else
> error "CONFIG_USB_OTG" not set

So we will have a separate drd fsm file, and the CONFIG_USB_OTG
and CONFIG_USB_OTG_FSM are not needed to be defined, right?

>
> >
> > For platforms which software finishes HNP/SRP using otg fsm code, need
> > to set both flags.
> >
> > For platforms which only do role switch through id pin, do not need to
> > set both.
> >
>
> OK. I get it now.
>
> >>
> >>> - otg-ver /* eh & otg supplement version */
> >>
> >> we can get otg version from the OTG controller. What exactly is the
> >> otg-ver in dts for?
> >
> > Since most of otg stuffs are software's, eg, for otg descriptor, we will
> > only use otg 2.0 descriptor when both CONFIG_USB_OTG20 and otg-ver = 20
> > are set.
>
> CONFIG_USB_OTG20 is redundant now. Plus I mentioned in the respective thread
> that it is not suitable for booting single image on different platforms.
>

Ok, agree. Then we need to define two usb otg descriptors
for both 1.3 and 2.0, and we need to have two otg descriptor array
at gadget driver. And the code at gadget driver will like below:

static const struct usb_descriptor_header *otg_desc_13[] = {
(struct usb_descriptor_header *) &(struct usb_otg_descriptor_13){
.bLength = sizeof(struct usb_otg_descriptor_13),
.bDescriptorType = USB_DT_OTG,

/*
* REVISIT SRP-only hardware is possible, although
* it would not be called "OTG" ...
*/
.bmAttributes = USB_OTG_SRP | USB_OTG_HNP,
},
NULL,
};

static const struct usb_descriptor_header *otg_desc_20[] = {
(struct usb_descriptor_header *) &(struct usb_otg_descriptor_20){
.bLength = sizeof(struct usb_otg_descriptor_20),
.bDescriptorType = USB_DT_OTG,

/*
* REVISIT SRP-only hardware is possible, although
* it would not be called "OTG" ...
*/
.bmAttributes = USB_OTG_SRP | USB_OTG_HNP,
.bcdOTG = cpu_to_le16(0x0200),
},
NULL,
};

During bind process:

if (gadget_is_otg_13(c->cdev->gadget))
c->descriptors = otg_desc_13;
else if (gadget_is_otg_20(c->cdev->gadget))
c->descriptors = otg_desc_20;

> As of now I can see 2 inputs regarding otg-ver
> - One comes from otg-ver DT property or platform data.
> - Second that may come from OTG controller registers. e.g. It might support
> OTG v3.0 but system designer wants to limit to OTG v2.0 via otg-ver.
>
> Controller driver can decide among the 2 and set the appropriate otg version
> in the data structure.
>

Yes, it is the same we do for usb mode.

> >
> >>
> >>> - adp-support /* board adp support */
> >>> - srp-support /* board srp support */
> >>> - hnp-support /* board hnp support */
> >>
> >> So if these options are not provided in DTS but the OTG core supports them then
> >> we keep the respective feature disabled?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> >> Won't this need dts change for existing boards?
> >
> > Does you know any dts based platform supports hnp/srp?
>
> I'm the wrong person to ask this. Maybe Felipe/Tony can comment.
> Irrespective of whether any dts platforms supports hsn/srp or not
> we must assume that till date dr_mode = otg implies full otg support
> and we cannot change its meaning.
>
> We can add new fields to indicate dual-role mode which is a new feature.

>
> > For chipidea platform, currently, we depends on kernel
> > configurations (CONFIG_USB_OTG_FSM), but it is incorrect way.
> >
> >>
> >> Instead how about having disable flags instead.
> >> - adp-disable /* board doesn't support adp */
> >> - srp-disable /* board doesn't support srp */
> >> - hnp-disable /* board doesn't support hnp */
> >>

Like I mentioned above, it depends on which otg features we would like
to give as default features for dual-role device.

For switching the role through the ID pin devices, we doesn't need any otg
features.
For adp/srp/hnp supported devices, we need (partial) otg features, and
the fsm (hardware or software) are needed.

> >> Now, if the flags are not provided in dts we use the OTG core's flags.
> >>
> >
> > How the OTG core's know if it supports these?
>
> By OTG core, I meant OTG controller core. At least the dwc3 OTG controller has
> register bits to identify if it supports adp/srp/hnp.
>
> But we also need to keep in mind that adp feature can be provided separately even
> if the OTG controller core doesn't support it.
>
> cheers,
> -roger
>
> >
> >>>
> >>> Currently, if CONFIG_USB_OTG and CONFIG_USB_OTG_FSM are enabled, we will
> >>> have otg fsm code (usb-otg-fsm.c).
> >>>
> >>> if (otg-support & otg-fsm-support)
> >>> this device has fully otg support, and will follow full otg fsm transitions.
> >>> else
> >>> this device is drd, and will follow simple otg fsm transtions.
> >>>
> >>
> >> cheers,
> >> -roger
> >>
> >
>

--

Best Regards,
Peter Chen


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-22 12:01    [W:0.127 / U:1.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site