mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Eggers <ceggers@arri.de>
To: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>,
	barebox@lists.infradead.org,
	Primoz Fiser <primoz.fiser@norik.com>
Subject: Re: Some USB memory sticks not (fully) recognized
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 08:10:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1867530.d7CUNdKKll@n95hx1g2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200810192643.GB31536@pengutronix.de>

Hi Sascha,

On Monday, 10 August 2020, 21:26:43 CEST, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> 
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 01:52:01PM +0200, Christian Eggers wrote:
> > On Thursday, 6 August 2020, 16:29:13 CEST, Christian Eggers wrote:
> > > I got a bug report that some newer USB memory sticks do not work with
> > > barebox. While with barebox-2020.01 these devices are not recognized at
> > > all, in barebox-2020.07 I get at least some warnings:
> > I checked again with an older release of barebox (2019-06). With this
> > version, the USB drive is detected:
> > [...]
> > Also mounting the drive works fine. So I guess that this problem may have
> > been introduced here:
> > 
> > b1d9837182 ("usb: Change power-on / scanning timeout handling")
> 
> Before guessing further could you verify that exactly this commit breaks
> your setup? There are a few more changes in the area that could be the
> culprit.
sorry, that was nonprofessional. In the meantime, I got some new findings:

- v2019.06 is the last release were the device is detected

- reverting b1d9837182 ("usb: Change power-on / scanning timeout handling")
doesn't change anything (so it's not related to this problem)

- the problem was definitely introduced in
6044d6c08e ("usb: host: ehci: Use to USBSTS to wait for transfer completion")

Debugging with and without 6044d6c08e showed that waiting for USBSTS:INT
is not sufficient as QT_TOKEN_STATUS_ACTIVE is still set after this. Turning
the dev_dbg() into an dev_err() clearly shows this:

> usb: USB: scanning bus for devices...
> usb1: Bus 001 Device 001: ID 0000:0000 EHCI Host Controller
> usb1-0: Bus 001 Device 002: ID 0424:4916 USB4916
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: usb1-0-1: unable to get descriptor, error 80000000
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> ERROR: imx-usb 2184200.usb@2184200.of: dev=3, usbsts=0x40081, p[1]=0x18001205, p[2]=0x0
> usb1-0-1: Bus 001 Device 003: ID 090c:3267 
> usb1-0-6: Bus 001 Device 004: ID 0424:494a USB2 Controller Hub
> usb: 4 USB Device(s) found

It seems that I can take multiple USBINTs until QT_TOKEN_STATUS_ACTIVE is
cleared. The following snippet works fine for me:

	volatile struct qTD *vtd;
	...
	vtd = td;
	do {
		ret = handshake(&ehci->hcor->or_usbsts, STS_USBINT, STS_USBINT,
				timeout_ms * 1000);
		if (ret < 0) {
			dev_err(ehci->dev, "handshake failed: %d\n", ret);
			ehci_enable_async_schedule(ehci, false);
			ehci_writel(&qh->qt_token, 0);
			return -ETIMEDOUT;
		}
		token = hc32_to_cpu(vtd->qt_token);
	} while (token & QT_TOKEN_STATUS_ACTIVE);

There is probably no benefit left compared to the version prior 6044d6c08e, so
if there is not better way to do this, I would propose to revert 6044d6c08e.

regards
Christian




_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-11  6:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-06 14:29 Christian Eggers
2020-08-10 11:52 ` Christian Eggers
2020-08-10 19:26   ` Sascha Hauer
2020-08-11  6:10     ` Christian Eggers [this message]
2020-08-11  6:33       ` Sascha Hauer
2020-08-12  8:35         ` [PATCH] Revert "usb: host: ehci: Use to USBSTS to wait for transfer completion" Christian Eggers
2020-08-14 13:21           ` Sascha Hauer

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1867530.d7CUNdKKll@n95hx1g2 \
    --to=ceggers@arri.de \
    --cc=andrew.smirnov@gmail.com \
    --cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=primoz.fiser@norik.com \
    --cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox