qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: ehci -> uhci handoff suggestions


From: Gerd Hoffmann
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: ehci -> uhci handoff suggestions
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 13:47:44 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100430 Fedora/3.0.4-2.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.4

On 05/25/10 15:40, David S. Ahern wrote:

USB 2.0 leverages companion UHCI or OHCI host controllers for full and
low speed devices. I do not see an appropriate means for doing that bus
transition and could use some suggestions.

Hmm.  Well.  That doesn't really fit into the qdev tree model ...

As I understand the code at this point it is a top down setup: device
added, bus found, device attached.

Devices are always added to some bus. In the case of usb the devices can also be attached/detached. Emulated devices usually attached right after creating them. Host devices are attached when a matching physical device shows up.

ie., key point is the expectation that the bus to which the device is
assigned is known early in the code path.

Yes.  You can even specify the bus you want attach the device to.

     --------------------      --------------------
    |   EHCI controller  |--->|    UHCI / OHCI     |
     --------------------      --------------------
              |                         |
     --------------------      --------------------
    |  USB device model  |    |  USB device model  |
    |    (or driver )    |    |    (or driver )    |
     --------------------      --------------------
          high speed             full / low speed


To know which bus to attach it to the device needs to be queried/probed
for basic information - something the current architecture does not have.

USB devices can support both 1.1 and 2.0, right? Who decides which protocol is used then? I think the OS can speak 1.1 to the device even in case a ehci controller is present (but unused by the OS), right?

Suggestions?

Maybe it makes more sense to look at ehci/uhci as *one* (physical) device with multiple interfaces? They share the physical ports after all, at least on real hardware.

The tricky case is assigning host devices, right? For the emulated ones we can probably could get away by simply forcing them into 2.0-only or 1.1-only mode depending on which bus they got attached to.

cheers,
  Gerd




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]