[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <X8EELU42XwBV9UV5@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 14:50:37 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Peter Chen <peter.chen@....com>
Cc: "balbi@...nel.org" <balbi@...nel.org>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"taehyun.cho" <taehyun.cho@...sung.com>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] USB: gadget: f_fs: add SuperSpeed Plus support
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 02:55:47AM +0000, Peter Chen wrote:
> On 20-11-26 19:09:36, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > From: "taehyun.cho" <taehyun.cho@...sung.com>
> >
> > Setup the descriptors for SuperSpeed Plus for f_fs. This allows the
> > gadget to work properly without crashing at SuperSpeed rates.
> >
> > Cc: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Peter Chen <peter.chen@....com>
> > Cc: stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: taehyun.cho <taehyun.cho@...sung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_fs.c | 5 +++++
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_fs.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_fs.c
> > index 046f770a76da..a34a7c96a1ab 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_fs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_fs.c
> > @@ -1327,6 +1327,7 @@ static long ffs_epfile_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned code,
> > struct usb_endpoint_descriptor *desc;
> >
> > switch (epfile->ffs->gadget->speed) {
> > + case USB_SPEED_SUPER_PLUS:
> > case USB_SPEED_SUPER:
> > desc_idx = 2;
> > break;
> > @@ -3222,6 +3223,10 @@ static int _ffs_func_bind(struct usb_configuration *c,
> > func->function.os_desc_n =
> > c->cdev->use_os_string ? ffs->interfaces_count : 0;
> >
> > + if (likely(super)) {
>
> Why likely is used? Currently, there are still lots of HS devices on market
> or on the development.
It looks to be a cut/paste of the other tests above, all of which say
"likely" which we all know is not true at all. I'll leave this now, and
add a patch that removes them all as this is NOT a function where it
should be used at all.
thanks for the review.
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists