Re: [PATCH v6 07/12] usb: otg: add OTG/dual-role core

[Peter Chen]

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 04:21:07PM +0800, Peter Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 07:00:22AM +0000, Jun Li wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Peter Chen [mailto:hzpeterchen@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 2:28 PM
> > > To: Jun Li <jun.li@xxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxx>; stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > balbi@xxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; peter.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx; jun.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > mathias.nyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; tony@xxxxxxxxxxx; Joao.Pinto@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > abrestic@xxxxxxxxxxxx; r.baldyga@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 07/12] usb: otg: add OTG/dual-role core
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 05:11:36AM +0000, Jun Li wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Peter Chen [mailto:hzpeterchen@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 11:47 AM
> > > > > To: Jun Li <jun.li@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > Cc: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxx>; stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > balbi@xxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > peter.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > jun.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mathias.nyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > tony@xxxxxxxxxxx; Joao.Pinto@xxxxxxxxxxxx; abrestic@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > r.baldyga@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 07/12] usb: otg: add OTG/dual-role core
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 02:07:56AM +0000, Jun Li wrote:
> > > > > > > +struct usb_otg *usb_otg_register(struct device *dev,
> > > > > > > +				 struct usb_otg_config *config) {
> > > > > > > +	struct usb_otg *otg;
> > > > > > > +	struct otg_wait_data *wait;
> > > > > > > +	int ret = 0;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	if (!dev || !config || !config->fsm_ops)
> > > > > > > +		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	/* already in list? */
> > > > > > > +	mutex_lock(&otg_list_mutex);
> > > > > > > +	if (usb_otg_get_data(dev)) {
> > > > > > > +		dev_err(dev, "otg: %s: device already in otg list\n",
> > > > > > > +			__func__);
> > > > > > > +		ret = -EINVAL;
> > > > > > > +		goto unlock;
> > > > > > > +	}
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	/* allocate and add to list */
> > > > > > > +	otg = kzalloc(sizeof(*otg), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > > > > +	if (!otg) {
> > > > > > > +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > > > > > +		goto unlock;
> > > > > > > +	}
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	otg->dev = dev;
> > > > > > > +	otg->caps = config->otg_caps;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	if ((otg->caps->hnp_support || otg->caps->srp_support ||
> > > > > > > +	     otg->caps->adp_support) && !config->otg_work)
> > > > > > > +		dev_info(dev, "otg: limiting to dual-role\n");
> > > > > >
> > > > > > dev_err, this should be an error.
> > > > >
> > > > > The condition may be wrong, but it is an information to show that
> > > > > current OTG is dual-role.
> > > >
> > > > This should not happen in any correct design, I even doubt if we
> > > > should try to continue by "downgrade" it to be duel role, currently
> > > > the only example user is dual role, so doing like this can't be tested
> > > > by real case, this downgrade is not so easy like we image, at least
> > > > for chipidea otg driver, simply replace a queue worker may not work,
> > > > as we have much more difference between the 2 configs.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Would you show more why chipidea can't work just replace the work item,
> > > and see if anything we still can improve for this framework?
> > 
> > In real OTG, we need enable AVV irq,
> 
> Enable and Handling AVV is platform stuff. In this framework, we are
> focus on how otg device manages host and gadget together, and the state
> machine when the related otg event occurs.
> 
> > but for duel role, nobody care/handle,
> > there are much more resource required for OTG: timers, hnp polling,
> > otg test device handling... 
> 
> They are common things for fully OTG fsm, you can move them
> to common code (In fact, hnp polling handling is already common code).
> 
> > 
> > with current design, chipidea driver can support real OTG with its own
> > queue worker, or DRD with Roger's drd work item if config is correct.
> > 
> > But improve something to work on a *wrong* config will make it complicated
> > and does not make much sense IMO.
> > 
> 
> What does above "config" you mean?
> 
> If the configure is fully OTG, you can choose different state machine,
> eg otg_statemachine, if you find it is hard for chipidea to use this
> framework, just list the reason, and see if we can improve.
> 

Roger, after discussing with Jun off line, we think usb_otg_register
should return -ENOTSUPP if platform is OTG capabilities (HNP || SRP ||
ADP), since this patch set does not cover fully otg features, the users
should not be confused when try to implement fully otg using this
framework.

Later, after your patch set is merged, we can add fully OTG features
using this framework, and remove this check.

What's your opinion?

-- 

Best Regards,
Peter Chen