| Message ID | 1364376543-7526-5-git-send-email-gautam.vivek@samsung.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
On 3/27/2013 2:59 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote: > Patch b6d7852c increases timeout for enumeration, taking > worst case to be 10 sec. > get_timer() api returns timestamp in micro-seconds, which is > what we are checking in the do-while() loop in usb_hub_configure() > (get_timer(start)< CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10). > This should give us a required check for 10 seconds, and thereby > we don't need to add additional mdelay of 100 microseconds in > each cycle. > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam<gautam.vivek@samsung.com> > CC: Vipin Kumar<vipin.kumar@st.com> > --- > common/usb_hub.c | 1 - > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/common/usb_hub.c b/common/usb_hub.c > index 0677004..d77f98d 100644 > --- a/common/usb_hub.c > +++ b/common/usb_hub.c > @@ -439,7 +439,6 @@ static int usb_hub_configure(struct usb_device *dev) > (portstatus& USB_PORT_STAT_CONNECTION)) > break; > > - mdelay(100); > } while (get_timer(start)< CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10); > > if (ret< 0) With this change, we are continuously reading the uhb status. Although this is also OK, but I feel 100 ms delay is better Still, there is no harm even if this patch is added. So, Reviewed-by: Vipin Kumar <vipin.kumar@st.com>
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:59:00PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: > Patch b6d7852c increases timeout for enumeration, taking > worst case to be 10 sec. > get_timer() api returns timestamp in micro-seconds, which is > what we are checking in the do-while() loop in usb_hub_configure() > (get_timer(start) < CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10). > This should give us a required check for 10 seconds, and thereby > we don't need to add additional mdelay of 100 microseconds in > each cycle. The wording here is not correct. get_timer operates in milliseconds not microseconds.
Hi, On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Tom Rini <trini@ti.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:59:00PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: > >> Patch b6d7852c increases timeout for enumeration, taking >> worst case to be 10 sec. >> get_timer() api returns timestamp in micro-seconds, which is >> what we are checking in the do-while() loop in usb_hub_configure() >> (get_timer(start) < CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10). >> This should give us a required check for 10 seconds, and thereby >> we don't need to add additional mdelay of 100 microseconds in >> each cycle. > > The wording here is not correct. get_timer operates in milliseconds not > microseconds. Oops!! Yes of course, my mistake. Thanks > > -- > Tom > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot >
Dear Vivek Gautam, > Hi, > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Tom Rini <trini@ti.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:59:00PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: > >> Patch b6d7852c increases timeout for enumeration, taking > >> worst case to be 10 sec. > >> get_timer() api returns timestamp in micro-seconds, which is > >> what we are checking in the do-while() loop in usb_hub_configure() > >> (get_timer(start) < CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10). > >> This should give us a required check for 10 seconds, and thereby > >> we don't need to add additional mdelay of 100 microseconds in > >> each cycle. > > > > The wording here is not correct. get_timer operates in milliseconds not > > microseconds. > > Oops!! Yes of course, my mistake. Thanks I have the patches queued in usb/next, you can send me a fix and I'll squash it with what's already in there. Best regards, Marek Vasut
Hi Marek, On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote: > Dear Vivek Gautam, > >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Tom Rini <trini@ti.com> wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:59:00PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: >> >> Patch b6d7852c increases timeout for enumeration, taking >> >> worst case to be 10 sec. >> >> get_timer() api returns timestamp in micro-seconds, which is >> >> what we are checking in the do-while() loop in usb_hub_configure() >> >> (get_timer(start) < CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10). >> >> This should give us a required check for 10 seconds, and thereby >> >> we don't need to add additional mdelay of 100 microseconds in >> >> each cycle. >> > >> > The wording here is not correct. get_timer operates in milliseconds not >> > microseconds. >> >> Oops!! Yes of course, my mistake. Thanks > > I have the patches queued in usb/next, you can send me a fix and I'll squash it > with what's already in there. Sure, i shall send a fix for this. Should it be good actually to respin the complete patch-series with the changes you have suggested ?? The patches i could see in the 'next' are the originally posted ones. > > Best regards, > Marek Vasut
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Marek, > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote: >> Dear Vivek Gautam, >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Tom Rini <trini@ti.com> wrote: >>> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:59:00PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: >>> >> Patch b6d7852c increases timeout for enumeration, taking >>> >> worst case to be 10 sec. >>> >> get_timer() api returns timestamp in micro-seconds, which is >>> >> what we are checking in the do-while() loop in usb_hub_configure() >>> >> (get_timer(start) < CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10). >>> >> This should give us a required check for 10 seconds, and thereby >>> >> we don't need to add additional mdelay of 100 microseconds in >>> >> each cycle. >>> > >>> > The wording here is not correct. get_timer operates in milliseconds not >>> > microseconds. >>> >>> Oops!! Yes of course, my mistake. Thanks >> >> I have the patches queued in usb/next, you can send me a fix and I'll squash it >> with what's already in there. > > Sure, i shall send a fix for this. > Should it be good actually to respin the complete patch-series with > the changes you have suggested ?? I was out on weekend, so couldn't update the patch-series. > The patches i could see in the 'next' are the originally posted ones. > >> >> Best regards, >> Marek Vasut > > > > -- > Thanks & Regards > Vivek
Dear Vivek Gautam, > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote: > >> Dear Vivek Gautam, > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Tom Rini <trini@ti.com> wrote: > >>> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:59:00PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: > >>> >> Patch b6d7852c increases timeout for enumeration, taking > >>> >> worst case to be 10 sec. > >>> >> get_timer() api returns timestamp in micro-seconds, which is > >>> >> what we are checking in the do-while() loop in usb_hub_configure() > >>> >> (get_timer(start) < CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10). > >>> >> This should give us a required check for 10 seconds, and thereby > >>> >> we don't need to add additional mdelay of 100 microseconds in > >>> >> each cycle. > >>> > > >>> > The wording here is not correct. get_timer operates in milliseconds > >>> > not microseconds. > >>> > >>> Oops!! Yes of course, my mistake. Thanks > >> > >> I have the patches queued in usb/next, you can send me a fix and I'll > >> squash it with what's already in there. > > > > Sure, i shall send a fix for this. > > Should it be good actually to respin the complete patch-series with > > the changes you have suggested ?? > > I was out on weekend, so couldn't update the patch-series. No problem, I'll drop it from next then, please send the whole series. Thanks! Best regards, Marek Vasut
diff --git a/common/usb_hub.c b/common/usb_hub.c index 0677004..d77f98d 100644 --- a/common/usb_hub.c +++ b/common/usb_hub.c @@ -439,7 +439,6 @@ static int usb_hub_configure(struct usb_device *dev) (portstatus & USB_PORT_STAT_CONNECTION)) break; - mdelay(100); } while (get_timer(start) < CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10); if (ret < 0)
Patch b6d7852c increases timeout for enumeration, taking worst case to be 10 sec. get_timer() api returns timestamp in micro-seconds, which is what we are checking in the do-while() loop in usb_hub_configure() (get_timer(start) < CONFIG_SYS_HZ * 10). This should give us a required check for 10 seconds, and thereby we don't need to add additional mdelay of 100 microseconds in each cycle. Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> CC: Vipin Kumar <vipin.kumar@st.com> --- common/usb_hub.c | 1 - 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)