linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] usb: musb: tusb6010_omap: Do not reset the other direction's packet size

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2d693d53-ba32-1549-90bd-da92f061cbed@ti.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 May 2017 09:19:17 +0300
From:   Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Bin Liu <b-liu@...com>
CC:     <tony@...mide.com>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        <vinod.koul@...el.com>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, <balbi@...nel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] usb: musb: tusb6010_omap: Do not reset the other
 direction's packet size



On 2017-05-11 02:16, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 12:07 -0500, Bin Liu wrote:
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:42:27AM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>>> We have one register for each EP to set the maximum packet size for both
>>> TX and RX.
>>> If for example an RX programming would happen before the previous TX
>>> transfer finishes we would reset the TX packet side.
>>>
>>> To fix this issue, only modify the TX or RX part of the register.
> []
>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/tusb6010_omap.c b/drivers/usb/musb/tusb6010_omap.c
> []
>>> @@ -389,15 +389,19 @@ static int tusb_omap_dma_program(struct dma_channel *channel, u16 packet_sz,
>>>   
>>>   	if (chdat->tx) {
>>>   		/* Send transfer_packet_sz packets at a time */
>>> -		musb_writel(ep_conf, TUSB_EP_MAX_PACKET_SIZE_OFFSET,
>>> -			chdat->transfer_packet_sz);
>>> +		u32 psize = musb_readl(ep_conf, TUSB_EP_MAX_PACKET_SIZE_OFFSET);
>>
>> checkpatch.pl complains about declaration and assignment together.
> 
> No it doesn't.

It 'only' complains about:
WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations

which is valid.

- Péter