Hi, Baolin Wang writes: >>> > Baolin Wang writes: >>> >>>> (One possible approach would be to have the setup routine return >>> >>>> different values for explicit and implicit status stages -- for >>> >>>> example, return 1 if it wants to submit an explicit status request. >>> >>>> That wouldn't be very different from the current >>> >>>> USB_GADGET_DELAYED_STATUS approach.) >>> >>> >>> >>> not really, no. The idea was for composite.c and/or functions to support >>> >>> both methods (temporarily) and use "gadget->wants_explicit_stages" to >>> >>> explicitly queue DATA and STATUS. That would mean that f_mass_storage >>> >>> wouldn't have to return DELAYED_STATUS if >>> >>> (gadget->wants_explicit_stages). >>> >>> >>> >>> After all UDCs are converted over and set wants_explicit_stages (which >>> >>> should all be done in a single series), then we get rid of the flag and >>> >>> the older method of DELAYED_STATUS. >>> >> >>> >> (Sorry for late reply due to my holiday) >>> >> I also met the problem pointed by Alan, from my test, I still want to >>> >> need one return value to indicate if it wants to submit an explicit >>> >> status request. Think about the Control-IN with a data stage, we can >>> >> not get the STATUS phase request from usb_ep_queue() call, and we need >>> > >>> > why not? wLength tells you that this is a 3-stage transfer. Gadget >>> > driver should be able to figure out that it needs to usb_ep_queue() >>> > another request for status stage. >>> >>> I tried again, but still can not work. Suppose the no-data control: >>> (1) SET_ADDRESS request: function driver will not queue one request >>> for status phase by usb_ep_queue() call. >> >> Function drivers do not handle Set-Address requests at all. The UDC >> driver handles these requests without telling the gadget driver about >> them. > > Correct. What I mean is it will not queue one request for status phase > by usb_ep_queue() call, UDC driver will do that. how the UDC driver handles this case, is up to the UDC driver. In DWC3 I chose to rely on the same ep_queue mechanism; but that's an arbitrary choice. >>> (2) SET_CONFIGURATION request: function driver will queue one 0-length >>> request for status phase by usb_ep_queue() call, especially for >>> mass_storage driver, it will queue one request for status phase >>> later. >>> >>> So I am not sure how the Gadget driver can figure out that it needs to >>> usb_ep_queue() another request for status stage when handling the >>> no-data control? >> >> Gadget drivers already queue status-stage requests for no-data >> control-OUT requests. The difficulty comes when you want to handle an >> IN request or an OUT request with a data stage. >> > > I try to explain that explicitly, In dwc3 driver, we can handle the > STATUS phase request in 2 places: (1) in usb_ep_queue(), (2) in > dwc3_ep0_xfernotready() this is the very detail that what I proposed will change. After what I proposed is implemented, status stage will *always* be done in response to a usb_ep_queue(). > For no-data control-OUT requests: > (1) SET_ADDRESS request: no request queued for status phase by > usb_ep_queue(), dwc3 driver need handle the STATUS phase request when > one not-ready-event comes in dwc3_ep0_xfernotready() function. or we change dwc3 to prepare an internal request and queue it to its own enpdoint. > (2) SET_CONFIGURATION request: function driver will queue one 0-length > request for status phase by usb_ep_queue(), but we can handle this > request in usb_ep_queue() or dwc3_ep0_xfernotready(). When the for DWC3, status stage *must* be done after XFER_NOT_READY event. That's required by the databook. What you're claiming is not correct. The only situation where we start status stage from usb_ep_queue() is for the case when XFER_NOT_READY already triggered and we set PENDING_REQUEST flag for the endpoint. > function driver queued one 0-length request for status phase before > the not-ready-event comes, we need handle this request in > dwc3_ep0_xfernotready() when the not-ready-event comes. When the > function driver queued one 0-length request for status phase after the > not-ready-event comes, we can handle this request in usb_ep_queue(). already implemented. Nothing will change for this case. > So in dwc3_ep0_xfernotready(), we need to check if the request for > status phase has been queued into pending request list, but if the > pending request list is NULL, which means the function driver have not > queued one 0-length request until now (then we can handle it in > usb_ep_queue()), or situation (1) (no request queued for status > phase), then I can not identify this 2 situations to determine where I > can handle the status request. Hope I make it clear. this is already implemented. There's nothing new coming to this case. -- balbi