Re: Multiple outstanding transfer vs xhci / ehci (Re: CVS commit: src/sys/dev/usb)

[Rin Okuyama <rokuyama.rk%gmail.com@localhost>]

On 2019/02/15 23:37, Nick Hudson wrote:
> On 15/02/2019 13:44, Rin Okuyama wrote:
> > On 2019/02/15 21:57, Jonathan A. Kollasch wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 06:35:14PM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On 2019/02/13 3:54, Nick Hudson wrote:
> > > > > On 12/02/2019 16:02, Rin Okuyama wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The system freezes indefinitely with xhci(4) or ehci(4), when NIC with
> > > > > > multiple outstanding transfers [axen(4), mue(4), and ure(4)] is stopped
> > > > > > by "ifconfig down" or detached.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As discussed in the previous message, this is due to infinite loop in
> > > > > > usbd_ar_pipe(); xfers with USBD_NOT_STARTED remain in a queue forever
> > > > > > because upm_abort [= xhci_device_bulk_abort() etc.] cannot remove them.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Why not the attached patch instead?
> > > > >
> > > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > > Thank you so much for your prompt reply!
> > > >
> > > > It works if s/ux_state/ux_status/ here:
> > > >
> > > > +        if (xfer->ux_state == USBD_NOT_STARTED) {
> > > >
> > > > Can I commit the revised patch?
> > >
> > > The revised patch results in
> > > https://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src/sys/dev/usb/ehci.c?r=1.265#1566
> > > firing upon `drvctl detach -d bwfm0` on Pinebook.
> > >
> > >     Jonathan Kollasch
> >
> > IMO, this is because NOT_STARTED queues are removed in a way that is
> > unexpected to ehci. For my old amd64 box, the attached patch fixes
> > assertion failures when devices are detached from ehci. I would like
> > to commit it together with the previous patch.
>
>
> ux_state has probably out lived its usefulness.
>
> Other/All HCs do the same ux_state check. So, either all need to be updated or we do the same XFER_ONQU to XFER_BUSY transition in usbd_ar_pipe
>
>
> Nick

The latter does not work because ehci and uhci also check its own flags,
ex_isdone and ux_isdone, respectively. Therefore, I chose the former:

http://www.netbsd.org/~rin/usbhc_freex_20190215.patch

Is this OK for you?

Thanks,
rin