linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Zengtao (B)" <prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>
To: Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com" <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>,
	"drinkcat@chromium.org" <drinkcat@chromium.org>,
	"felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com" <felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com>,
	"drake@endlessm.com" <drake@endlessm.com>,
	"mike.looijmans@topic.nl" <mike.looijmans@topic.nl>,
	"joe@perches.com" <joe@perches.com>,
	"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] usb: hub: try old enumeration scheme first for high speed devices
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 10:59:38 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <678F3D1BB717D949B966B68EAEB446ED0C9B33C7@dggemm526-mbx.china.huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f4372b12-327c-ee51-76ae-2e2bc5cdceed@ti.com>

Hi Roger:

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger Quadros [mailto:rogerq@ti.com]
>Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 3:17 PM
>To: Zengtao (B) <prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>; Alan Stern
><stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
>Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com;
>drinkcat@chromium.org; felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com;
>drake@endlessm.com; mike.looijmans@topic.nl; joe@perches.com;
>linux-usb@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: hub: try old enumeration scheme first for high
>speed devices
>
>On 16/08/18 09:21, Zengtao (B) wrote:
>> Hi alan:
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Alan Stern [mailto:stern@rowland.harvard.edu]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2018 10:40 PM
>>> To: Zengtao (B) <prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>
>>> Cc: Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org;
>>> mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com; drinkcat@chromium.org;
>>> felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com; drake@endlessm.com;
>>> mike.looijmans@topic.nl; joe@perches.com; linux-usb@vger.kernel.org;
>>> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>> Subject: RE: [PATCH] usb: hub: try old enumeration scheme first for
>>> high speed devices
>>>
>>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2018, Zengtao (B) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi alan:
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: linux-usb-owner@vger.kernel.org
>>>>> [mailto:linux-usb-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Alan Stern
>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2018 10:20 PM
>>>>> To: Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>
>>>>> Cc: Zengtao (B) <prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>;
>>>>> gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com;
>>>>> drinkcat@chromium.org; felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com;
>>>>> drake@endlessm.com; mike.looijmans@topic.nl; joe@perches.com;
>>>>> linux-usb@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: hub: try old enumeration scheme first for
>>>>> high speed devices
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/08/18 18:01, Zeng Tao wrote:
>>>>>>> The new scheme is required just to support legacy low and
>>>>>>> full-speed devices. For high speed devices, it will slower the
>>>>>>> enumeration
>>> speed.
>>>>>>> So in this patch we try the "old" enumeration scheme first for
>>>>>>> high speed devices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How slow does it get? Is it significant?
>>>>>> Do we risk breaking existing HS devices that work? I don't think
>>>>>> we can be sure till we run this through testing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed.  I am extremely skeptical about a patch like this, unless
>>>>> somebody can show that Windows uses the "old" scheme for
>high-speed
>>> devices.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this is what the windows has done, you can refer to
>>>>
>https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/usbcoreblog/2013/04/11/usb-2-1-2-0-
>>>> 1- 1-device-enumeration-changes-in-windows-8/
>>>
>>> And that blog post is 5 years old!
>>>
>>> Okay, I think we can go ahead and make this change.  However, you
>>> should update the patch description to mention what Microsoft did in
>>> Windows 8 and say that the new behavior matches theirs.
>>>
>> Okay, I will update it the change log in v2.
>>
>>> Also, as Roger mentioned, you should update the documentation to say
>>> that the old_scheme_first module parameter now applies only to low-
>>> and full-speed devices, since high- and SuperSpeed devices always use
>the old scheme first.
>>>
>>
>> Since we should have dedicated enumeration flow for SS, HIGH, low and
>> full speed devices, So I think the old_scheme_first and use_both_schemes
>parameters should be removed.
>> What do you think about it?
>
>I think we should retain them as some host controllers can have issues and
>these parameters give some control to system integrators to workaround if
>required.
>
>I'm aware of one errata [1] that requires the old_scheme_first to be set in
>certain circumstances.
>
>[1] http://www.ti.com/lit/er/sprz429l/sprz429l.pdf
>Section i897

I 'd rather to use a quirk to workaround.
And the main idea is to keep the enumeration flow as simple as possible.

>
>--
>Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
>Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki

  reply	other threads:[~2018-08-16 10:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-10 15:01 [PATCH] usb: hub: try old enumeration scheme first for high speed devices Zeng Tao
2018-08-10 10:50 ` Roger Quadros
2018-08-10 14:19   ` Alan Stern
2018-08-14  7:35     ` Zengtao (B)
2018-08-14 14:39       ` Alan Stern
2018-08-16  6:21         ` Zengtao (B)
2018-08-16  7:16           ` Roger Quadros
2018-08-16 10:59             ` Zengtao (B) [this message]
2018-08-16 11:13               ` Roger Quadros
2018-08-17  2:15                 ` Zengtao (B)
2018-08-14  7:33   ` Zengtao (B)
2018-08-16  7:31     ` Roger Quadros
2018-09-28 11:27 Zeng Tao

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=678F3D1BB717D949B966B68EAEB446ED0C9B33C7@dggemm526-mbx.china.huawei.com \
    --to=prime.zeng@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=drake@endlessm.com \
    --cc=drinkcat@chromium.org \
    --cc=felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=mike.looijmans@topic.nl \
    --cc=rogerq@ti.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).