Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbarysh...@gmail.com> writes:
> Extract lubbock-specific code from pxa25x_udc driver. As a bonus, phy
> driver determines connector/VBUS status by reading CPLD register. Also
> it uses a work to call into udc stack, instead of pinging vbus session
> right from irq handler.
This comment is not accurate anymore, right ? The work call, etc ...
Moreover, I have this compile error:
drivers/built-in.o: In function `lubbock_vbus_remove':
/home/rj/mio_linux/kernel/drivers/usb/phy/phy-lubbock.c:200: undefined
reference to `usb_remove_phy'
drivers/built-in.o: In function `lubbock_vbus_probe':
/home/rj/mio_linux/kernel/drivers/usb/phy/phy-lubbock.c:186: undefined
reference to `usb_add_phy'
Makefile:922: recipe for target 'vmlinux' failed
A select in Kconfig is missing, right ?
And then :
genirq: Threaded irq requested with handler=NULL and !ONESHOT for irq 294
lubbock-vbus lubbock-vbus: can't request irq 294, err: -22
lubbock-vbus: probe of lubbock-vbus failed with error -22
> +static int is_vbus_powered(void)
> +{
> + return !(LUB_MISC_RD && BIT(9));
That BIT(9) is a bit ugly. Moreover the "&&" is certainly wrong.
A define somewhere would be fine.
> +}
> +
> +static void lubbock_vbus_handle(struct lubbock_vbus_data *lubbock_vbus)
I have not reviewed that one thoroughly ...
> +
> +/* VBUS change IRQ handler */
> +static irqreturn_t lubbock_vbus_irq(int irq, void *data)
> +{
> + struct platform_device *pdev = data;
> + struct lubbock_vbus_data *lubbock_vbus = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + struct usb_otg *otg = lubbock_vbus->phy.otg;
> +
> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "VBUS %s (gadget: %s)\n",
> + is_vbus_powered() ? "supplied" : "inactive",
> + otg->gadget ? otg->gadget->name : "none");
> +
> + switch (irq) {
> + case LUBBOCK_USB_IRQ:
> + disable_irq(LUBBOCK_USB_IRQ);
> + enable_irq(LUBBOCK_USB_DISC_IRQ);
> + break;
> + case LUBBOCK_USB_DISC_IRQ:
> + disable_irq(LUBBOCK_USB_DISC_IRQ);
> + enable_irq(LUBBOCK_USB_IRQ);
> + break;
> + default:
> + return IRQ_NONE;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * No need to use workqueue here - we are in a threded handler,
> + * so we can sleep.
> + */
What if a new interrupt occurs in here, and preempts this thread.
> + if (otg->gadget)
> + lubbock_vbus_handle(lubbock_vbus);
I think the enable_irq() call should be here. I can't have an ordering problem
at this point, right ?
> + err = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, LUBBOCK_USB_DISC_IRQ,
> + NULL, lubbock_vbus_irq, 0, "vbus disconnect", pdev);
> + if (err) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "can't request irq %i, err: %d\n",
> + LUBBOCK_USB_DISC_IRQ, err);
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + err = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, LUBBOCK_USB_IRQ,
> + NULL, lubbock_vbus_irq, 0, "vbus connect", pdev);
> + if (err) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "can't request irq %i, err: %d\n",
> + LUBBOCK_USB_IRQ, err);
> + return err;
> + }
Here you have both interrupts enabled, this will mean one interrupt at least
will fire. And of course the other one will be enabled a second time, hence
imbalance.
If you want to have an initial status of disconnected gadget, just enable ti
connect interrupt at probing.
Cheers.
--
Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
