Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1562531 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability

Started byIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
First post2017-01-19 10:50 +0100
Last post2017-01-26 04:30 +0100
Articles 3 on this page of 23 — 3 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-19 10:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-20 03:50 +0100
      Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-22 10:10 +0100
        Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-24 05:50 +0100
          Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-24 09:30 +0100
            Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-25 06:30 +0100
              Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-25 10:30 +0100
                Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-01-25 11:00 +0100
                  Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-25 13:30 +0100
                    Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-01-25 15:40 +0100
                      Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-25 17:00 +0100
                        Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-01-25 17:20 +0100
                          Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-26 04:40 +0100
                            Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-26 08:20 +0100
                              Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-26 08:50 +0100
                                Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-26 09:20 +0100
                              Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-01-26 11:30 +0100
                                Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-26 17:10 +0100
                                  Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-01-26 18:50 +0100
                                    Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-27 08:00 +0100
                        Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-26 08:30 +0100
                Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-25 13:20 +0100
                Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] usb: dbc: early driver for xhci debug capability Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-26 04:30 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]


#1567141

FromIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Date2017-01-26 08:30 +0100
Message-ID<t3MFj-4sB-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1566707
* Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 01/25/2017 10:38 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 08:27:38PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> >> In my driver, udelay() is mostly used to handle time out.
> >>
> >> Xdbc hides most USB things in its firmware. Early printk driver only needs
> >> to setup the registers/data structures and wait until link ready or time out.
> >> Without udelay(), I have no means to convert the polling times into waiting
> >> time.
> > What is timeout and why?
> 
> Put it in simple:
> 
> The driver sets the RUN bit in control register and polls READY
> bit in status register for the successful USB device enumeration.
> As the USB device enumeration might fail and the READY bit will
> never be set, the driver must have a timeout logic to avoid
> endless loop.

Is there any error status available in the host registers anywhere that tells us 
that enumeration did not succeed?

Thanks,

	Ingo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1566549

FromLu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Date2017-01-25 13:20 +0100
Message-ID<t3uIp-1E5-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1566407
Hi,

On 01/25/2017 05:23 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>>> Hiding essentially an early udelay() implementation in an early-printk driver is 
>>> ugly and counterproductive.
>> Sure. How about below change?
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/early/xhci-dbc.c b/drivers/usb/early/xhci-dbc.c
>> index d3f0c84..940989e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/early/xhci-dbc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/early/xhci-dbc.c
>> @@ -587,6 +587,35 @@ static int xdbc_bulk_transfer(void *data, int size, bool read)
>>         return size;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void __init xdbc_udelay_calibration(void)
>> +{
>> +       unsigned long lpj = 0;
>> +       unsigned int tsc_khz, cpu_khz;
>> +
>> +       if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC))
>> +               goto calibration_out;
>> +
>> +       cpu_khz = x86_platform.calibrate_cpu();
>> +       tsc_khz = x86_platform.calibrate_tsc();
>> +
>> +       if (tsc_khz == 0)
>> +               tsc_khz = cpu_khz;
>> +       else if (abs(cpu_khz - tsc_khz) * 10 > tsc_khz)
>> +               cpu_khz = tsc_khz;
>> +
>> +       if (!tsc_khz)
>> +               goto calibration_out;
>> +
>> +       lpj = tsc_khz * 1000;
>> +       do_div(lpj, HZ);
>> +
>> +calibration_out:
>> +       if (!lpj)
>> +               lpj = 1 << 22;
>> +
>> +       loops_per_jiffy = lpj;
>> +}
>> +
>>  static int __init xdbc_early_setup(void)
>>  {
>>         int ret;
>> @@ -686,6 +715,8 @@ int __init early_xdbc_parse_parameter(char *s)
>>         }
>>         xdbc.xdbc_reg = (struct xdbc_regs __iomem *)(xdbc.xhci_base + offset);
>>  
>> +       xdbc_udelay_calibration();
>> +
>>         return 0;
>>  }
> Yeah - so could we do this in a more generic fashion, not in the early-printk 
> driver but in core x86 code?
>

Sure. I will move this to arch/x86/kernel/setup.c.

Best regards,
Lu Baolu

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1567096

FromLu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Date2017-01-26 04:30 +0100
Message-ID<t3IV4-2dX-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1566407
Hi Ingo,

On 01/25/2017 05:23 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>>> Hiding essentially an early udelay() implementation in an early-printk driver is 
>>> ugly and counterproductive.
>> Sure. How about below change?
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/early/xhci-dbc.c b/drivers/usb/early/xhci-dbc.c
>> index d3f0c84..940989e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/early/xhci-dbc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/early/xhci-dbc.c
>> @@ -587,6 +587,35 @@ static int xdbc_bulk_transfer(void *data, int size, bool read)
>>         return size;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void __init xdbc_udelay_calibration(void)
>> +{
>> +       unsigned long lpj = 0;
>> +       unsigned int tsc_khz, cpu_khz;
>> +
>> +       if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC))
>> +               goto calibration_out;
>> +
>> +       cpu_khz = x86_platform.calibrate_cpu();
>> +       tsc_khz = x86_platform.calibrate_tsc();
>> +
>> +       if (tsc_khz == 0)
>> +               tsc_khz = cpu_khz;
>> +       else if (abs(cpu_khz - tsc_khz) * 10 > tsc_khz)
>> +               cpu_khz = tsc_khz;
>> +
>> +       if (!tsc_khz)
>> +               goto calibration_out;
>> +
>> +       lpj = tsc_khz * 1000;
>> +       do_div(lpj, HZ);
>> +
>> +calibration_out:
>> +       if (!lpj)
>> +               lpj = 1 << 22;
>> +
>> +       loops_per_jiffy = lpj;
>> +}
>> +
>>  static int __init xdbc_early_setup(void)
>>  {
>>         int ret;
>> @@ -686,6 +715,8 @@ int __init early_xdbc_parse_parameter(char *s)
>>         }
>>         xdbc.xdbc_reg = (struct xdbc_regs __iomem *)(xdbc.xhci_base + offset);
>>  
>> +       xdbc_udelay_calibration();
>> +
>>         return 0;
>>  }
> Yeah - so could we do this in a more generic fashion, not in the early-printk 
> driver but in core x86 code?

How about below changes?

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
index 4cfba94..aab7faa 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
@@ -835,6 +835,26 @@ dump_kernel_offset(struct notifier_block *self, unsigned long v, void *p)
        return 0;
 }
 
+static void __init simple_udelay_calibration(void)
+{
+       unsigned int tsc_khz, cpu_khz;
+       unsigned long lpj;
+
+       if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC))
+               return;
+
+       cpu_khz = x86_platform.calibrate_cpu();
+       tsc_khz = x86_platform.calibrate_tsc();
+
+       tsc_khz = tsc_khz ? : cpu_khz;
+       if (!tsc_khz)
+               return;
+
+       lpj = tsc_khz * 1000;
+       do_div(lpj, HZ);
+       loops_per_jiffy = lpj;
+}
+
 /*
  * Determine if we were loaded by an EFI loader.  If so, then we have also been
  * passed the efi memmap, systab, etc., so we should use these data structures
@@ -983,6 +1003,8 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
         */
        x86_configure_nx();
 
+       simple_udelay_calibration();
+
        parse_early_param();


If it's okay for you, do you want it in a separated patch or part of patch 2/4?

Best regards,
Lu Baolu

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web