From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE1FAC11F68 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:21:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34B461474 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:21:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233169AbhF3SYJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:24:09 -0400 Received: from netrider.rowland.org ([192.131.102.5]:49789 "HELO netrider.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S233030AbhF3SYI (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:24:08 -0400 Received: (qmail 745964 invoked by uid 1000); 30 Jun 2021 14:21:38 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:21:37 -0400 From: Alan Stern To: Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com, alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com, Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com, Cristian.Birsan@microchip.com, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: host: ohci-at91: suspend/resume ports after/before OHCI accesses Message-ID: <20210630182137.GA743974@rowland.harvard.edu> References: <20210609230735.GA1861855@rowland.harvard.edu> <0621eaba-db4d-a174-1b15-535e804b52ac@microchip.com> <20210623135915.GB491169@rowland.harvard.edu> <20210623141907.GC491169@rowland.harvard.edu> <8bff20a7-8eb8-276a-086e-f1729fbbdbe4@microchip.com> <20210623164148.GC499969@rowland.harvard.edu> <20210624132304.GA528247@rowland.harvard.edu> <856493cd-9d53-24b3-8e8b-c3c366f282bd@microchip.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <856493cd-9d53-24b3-8e8b-c3c366f282bd@microchip.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 02:46:47PM +0000, Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com wrote: > On 24.06.2021 16:23, Alan Stern wrote: > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 06:40:25AM +0000, Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com wrote: > >> On 23.06.2021 19:41, Alan Stern wrote: > >>> Are there any systems beside the SAMA7G5 and others you tested which > >>> might be affected by this patch? Do they all work pretty much the > >>> same way? (I want to make sure no others will be adversely affected > >>> by this change.) > >> > >> I tested it on SAMA7G5, SAMA5D2 and SAM9X60. I tested the suspend/resume > >> to/from mem. On SAMA5D2 and SAM9X60 there is no clock provided by > >> transceiver A to OHCI. I encountered no issues on tested systems. These IPs > >> are also present on SAMA5D3 and SAMA5D4 systems which I haven't tested as I > >> expect to behave as SAMA5D2 (as the clocking scheme is the same with > >> SAMA5D2). I can also try it on a SAMA5D3 (I don't have a SAMA5D4 with me at > >> the moment), tough, just to be sure nothing is broken there too. > > > > That doesn't answer my question. I asked if there were any systems > > which might be affected by your patch, and you listed a bunch of > > systems that _aren't_ affected (that is, they continue to work > > properly). > > I wrongly understood the initial question. > > > > > What systems might run into trouble with this patch? > > These are all I haven't tested and might be affected: > AT91RM9200, > SAM9260, > SAM9261, > SAM9263, > SAM9N12, > SAM9X35, > SAM9G45. > > The last two (SAM9X35 and SAM9G45) have the same clocking scheme with > SAMA5D2 (which I tested). For the rest of them I cannot find the clocking > scheme in datasheet and don't have them to test (at least at the moment). I see. That seems reasonable; the others are probably the same as the ones you tested. Did you ever answer the question that Nicolas raised back on June 9 in: https://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=162324242003349&w=2 Alan Stern From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9462AC11F65 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:23:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57730613F5 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:23:40 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 57730613F5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=rowland.harvard.edu Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=Zn9hlGeOQv80AdYGqzGf1uFR3I28Kc+F5kgjYXYB/0w=; b=tQTnx3GH92Uq87 DLm4K/fEL12mW+62ECNbZsmxl6TclZzQkxrEn5cDS7cC/VUM7jHrQIkZTYKFK+4YD2bSPS50+l+Fz Pwx+AEXIx+amNdNtt/7hI0ncZ65GBSscpHg/UW8YtGC4FlCOC6/L7LMxUlXI25rMbj8KByTRUkwTd 8foPGOenVGgEmUZ4uw57D+jxaRDya8RgRbkSSeRGTn0cDYjEX86f34yoRt3nHhyB7D8hm1oRNWbfb xvK07NBfsQIBhtDUYzBsnRaAK97YpYsn3ImS1+V8grxj66CZzuJ81XhLin7Mue4y56CUDadAKS3H5 JNhtx+imm/dZAx9GsxlA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lyeqL-00EuhW-TR; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:21:50 +0000 Received: from netrider.rowland.org ([192.131.102.5]) by bombadil.infradead.org with smtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lyeqE-00EufV-2h for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:21:43 +0000 Received: (qmail 745964 invoked by uid 1000); 30 Jun 2021 14:21:38 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:21:37 -0400 From: Alan Stern To: Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: host: ohci-at91: suspend/resume ports after/before OHCI accesses Message-ID: <20210630182137.GA743974@rowland.harvard.edu> References: <20210609230735.GA1861855@rowland.harvard.edu> <0621eaba-db4d-a174-1b15-535e804b52ac@microchip.com> <20210623135915.GB491169@rowland.harvard.edu> <20210623141907.GC491169@rowland.harvard.edu> <8bff20a7-8eb8-276a-086e-f1729fbbdbe4@microchip.com> <20210623164148.GC499969@rowland.harvard.edu> <20210624132304.GA528247@rowland.harvard.edu> <856493cd-9d53-24b3-8e8b-c3c366f282bd@microchip.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <856493cd-9d53-24b3-8e8b-c3c366f282bd@microchip.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210630_112142_317374_2FC3E275 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.98 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Cristian.Birsan@microchip.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 02:46:47PM +0000, Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com wrote: > On 24.06.2021 16:23, Alan Stern wrote: > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 06:40:25AM +0000, Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com wrote: > >> On 23.06.2021 19:41, Alan Stern wrote: > >>> Are there any systems beside the SAMA7G5 and others you tested which > >>> might be affected by this patch? Do they all work pretty much the > >>> same way? (I want to make sure no others will be adversely affected > >>> by this change.) > >> > >> I tested it on SAMA7G5, SAMA5D2 and SAM9X60. I tested the suspend/resume > >> to/from mem. On SAMA5D2 and SAM9X60 there is no clock provided by > >> transceiver A to OHCI. I encountered no issues on tested systems. These IPs > >> are also present on SAMA5D3 and SAMA5D4 systems which I haven't tested as I > >> expect to behave as SAMA5D2 (as the clocking scheme is the same with > >> SAMA5D2). I can also try it on a SAMA5D3 (I don't have a SAMA5D4 with me at > >> the moment), tough, just to be sure nothing is broken there too. > > > > That doesn't answer my question. I asked if there were any systems > > which might be affected by your patch, and you listed a bunch of > > systems that _aren't_ affected (that is, they continue to work > > properly). > > I wrongly understood the initial question. > > > > > What systems might run into trouble with this patch? > > These are all I haven't tested and might be affected: > AT91RM9200, > SAM9260, > SAM9261, > SAM9263, > SAM9N12, > SAM9X35, > SAM9G45. > > The last two (SAM9X35 and SAM9G45) have the same clocking scheme with > SAMA5D2 (which I tested). For the rest of them I cannot find the clocking > scheme in datasheet and don't have them to test (at least at the moment). I see. That seems reasonable; the others are probably the same as the ones you tested. Did you ever answer the question that Nicolas raised back on June 9 in: https://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=162324242003349&w=2 Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel