Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: gadget: Fix broken gadget on system suspend/resume

[Felipe Balbi]

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 05:32:00PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> On 11/12/2014 05:08 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 04:58:16PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >> On TI SoCs (e.g. DRA7) we don't support the DWC3 hibernation feature.
> >> We need to stop the gadget controller while system suspend
> >> else it results in L3 Bus errors on resume with broken
> >> USB gadget on J6-evm.
> >>
> >> [   55.718226] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at drivers/bus/omap_l3_noc.c:147 l3_interrupt_handler+0x224/0x31c()
> >> [   55.718232] 44000000.ocp:L3 Custom Error: MASTER USB3 TARGET GPMC (Idle): Data Access in User mode during Functional access
> >> [   55.718263] Modules linked in: usb_f_ss_lb g_zero libcomposite configfs xhci_hcd btwilink bluetooth dwc3 6lowpan_iphc m25p80 dwc3_omap omap_remoteproc
> >> [   55.718271] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.14.19-02011-g3ece3ca-dirty #658
> >> [   55.718290] [<c0016090>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c0012060>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
> >> [   55.718302] [<c0012060>] (show_stack) from [<c062a2e4>] (dump_stack+0x78/0x94)
> >> [   55.718315] [<c062a2e4>] (dump_stack) from [<c0043bc4>] (warn_slowpath_common+0x6c/0x90)
> >> [   55.718325] [<c0043bc4>] (warn_slowpath_common) from [<c0043c7c>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x30/0x40)
> >> [   55.718336] [<c0043c7c>] (warn_slowpath_fmt) from [<c030fb24>] (l3_interrupt_handler+0x224/0x31c)
> >> [   55.718348] [<c030fb24>] (l3_interrupt_handler) from [<c0093010>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x5c/0x23c)
> >> [   55.718358] [<c0093010>] (handle_irq_event_percpu) from [<c009322c>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c)
> >> [   55.718367] [<c009322c>] (handle_irq_event) from [<c0096160>] (handle_fasteoi_irq+0x98/0x158)
> >> [   55.718377] [<c0096160>] (handle_fasteoi_irq) from [<c00929dc>] (generic_handle_irq+0x20/0x30)
> >> [   55.718385] [<c00929dc>] (generic_handle_irq) from [<c000eea8>] (handle_IRQ+0x4c/0xb0)
> >> [   55.718393] [<c000eea8>] (handle_IRQ) from [<c0008638>] (gic_handle_irq+0x28/0x5c)
> >> [   55.718402] [<c0008638>] (gic_handle_irq) from [<c0630964>] (__irq_svc+0x44/0x5c)
> >> [   55.718406] Exception stack(0xc09c1f68 to 0xc09c1fb0)
> >> [   55.718412] 1f60:                   00000001 00000001 00000000 00000000 c09c0000 00000000
> >> [   55.718418] 1f80: c09c0000 c09c0000 c0a7a1e4 c09c8938 c09c89b4 00000000 60000093 c09c1fb0
> >> [   55.718423] 1fa0: c008a2e4 c00926cc 60000013 ffffffff
> >> [   55.718433] [<c0630964>] (__irq_svc) from [<c00926cc>] (cpu_startup_entry+0x100/0x1f4)
> >> [   55.718444] [<c00926cc>] (cpu_startup_entry) from [<c0901ac4>] (start_kernel+0x324/0x388)
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c | 8 +++++++-
> >>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
> >> index 3818b26..bc15b54 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
> >> @@ -2741,7 +2741,13 @@ int dwc3_gadget_prepare(struct dwc3 *dwc)
> > 
> > there is no more dwc3_gadget_prepare(), please rebase on 'next'.
> 
> right.
> 
> > 
> >>  {
> >>  	if (dwc->pullups_connected) {
> >>  		dwc3_gadget_disable_irq(dwc);
> >> -		dwc3_gadget_run_stop(dwc, true, true);
> >> +		if (dwc->has_hibernation) {
> >> +			dwc3_gadget_run_stop(dwc, true, true);
> >> +		} else {
> >> +			dwc3_gadget_run_stop(dwc, false, true);
> >> +			/* remember to connect back on resume */
> >> +			dwc->pullups_connected = true;
> >> +		}
> > 
> > Another thing you probably want to do is make sure there is nothing
> > pending on our request list because if there is, then we need to wait
> > for any in-flight transfers to complete before disconnecting.
> 
> shouldn't that check be done in dwc3_gadget_run_stop()?

no, gadget drivers only disconnect pullups when they know there's
nothing pending. And sometimes, we actually want to break such transfers
to see how the thing would behave. Only suspend/resume needs to make
transfers complete before hand.

> > I also wonder if current code isn't really fragile... I mean, when you
> > clear run_stop bit, you should notify the gadget by means of
> > ->disconnect() and so on... But since we can't test this with mainline,
> > then it's difficult to tell.
> > 
> that is true.

Not sure what to do with this patch :-p

-- 
balbi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature