[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=UutvJE+k4W0sQDs6q+oOfbz5Tz670+L-8fFHfdB=KytQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:06:44 -0800
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Minas Harutyunyan <hminas@...opsys.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Antti Seppälä <a.seppala@...il.com>,
Boris ARZUR <boris@...bu.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
Martin Schiller <ms@....tdt.de>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH 2/4] usb: dwc2: Do not update data length if it is 0
on inbound transfers
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:04 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>
> The DWC2 documentation states that transfers with zero data length should
> set the number of packets to 1 and the transfer length to 0. This is not
> currently the case for inbound transfers: the transfer length is set to
> the maximum packet length. This can have adverse effects if the chip
> actually does transfer data as it is programmed to do. Follow chip
> documentation and keep the transfer length set to 0 in that situation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> ---
> drivers/usb/dwc2/hcd.c | 15 ++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
I don't have any other test setup that you don't have, so just giving
my review tag and not tested tag.
I will note that it feels like this should have a "Fixes" tag or a
direct Cc to stable to make it obvious that it should make its way
back to stable trees.
Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists