From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Dec 12 07:46:03 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B60ECD6;
 Thu, 12 Dec 2013 07:46:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mta05.bitpro.no (mta05.bitpro.no [92.42.64.202])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 447E81591;
 Thu, 12 Dec 2013 07:46:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.lockless.no (mail.lockless.no [46.29.221.38])
 by mta05.bitpro.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4671817FC7E;
 Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:45:56 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by mail.lockless.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id C32E98FEB19;
 Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:46:35 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.6.4 (20090625) (Debian) at lockless.no
Received: from mail.lockless.no ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (mail.lockless.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id C3iWEhmbdjHv; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:46:34 +0100 (CET)
Received: from laptop015.home.selasky.org
 (cm-176.74.213.204.customer.telag.net [176.74.213.204])
 by mail.lockless.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B0B1B8FEB18;
 Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:46:34 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <52A969F6.3010201@bitfrost.no>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:47:02 +0100
From: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@bitfrost.no>
Organization: Bitfrost A/S
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kohji Okuno <okuno.kohji@jp.panasonic.com>
Subject: Re: spec violation of xHCI?
References: <52A85FAA.8030402@bitfrost.no>
 <20131211.220615.1986324315440989553.okuno.kohji@jp.panasonic.com>
 <52A870FA.5080803@bitfrost.no>
 <20131212.095958.798647707277033359.okuno.kohji@jp.panasonic.com>
 <52A96276.3060203@bitfrost.no>
In-Reply-To: <52A96276.3060203@bitfrost.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-usb@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 07:46:03 -0000

On 12/12/13 08:15, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On 12/12/13 01:59, Kohji Okuno wrote:
>
> Hi Kohji,
>
> Did you check using a USB analyzer what the difference is when setting
> the CHAIN bit and not setting the chain bit?
>
> I would guess that if you set the CHAIN-bit in this case, no ZLP will be
> sent, because the TRB is associated with the previous one.
>
> What endpoint type is this? BULK/CONTROL/INTR/ISOC
>
> What direction is this? IN or OUT?
>
> --HPS

Hi Kohji,

If there is no CHAIN bit in the IN-direction, my TD chain will receive 
multiple short packets. This is of course not correct. This only happens 
if you have very large buffers above 64KByte that don't fit in a single TD.

For OUT direction:
There are no short packets received, though errors can happen and those 
will stop the endpoint. Are we sure that by setting the CHAIN bit, that 
the HC's will transfer ZLP's if the length of the second last "TD" is a 
multiple of wMaxPacketSize and the last one has a length of zero bytes?

I will do some testing to verify the corner cases.

Thank you!

--HPS