[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <X9H/ZVpHf2Owd6rj@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 11:58:45 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Ikjoon Jang <ikjn@...omium.org>
Cc: linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Zhanyong Wang <zhanyong.wang@...iatek.com>,
Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com>,
Tianping Fang <tianping.fang@...iatek.com>,
Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] usb: xhci-mtk: fix unreleased bandwidth data
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 06:47:47PM +0800, Ikjoon Jang wrote:
> xhci-mtk has hooks on add_endpoint() and drop_endpoint() from xhci
> to handle its own sw bandwidth managements and stores bandwidth data
> into internal table every time add_endpoint() is called,
> so when bandwidth allocation fails at one endpoint, all earlier
> allocation from the same interface could still remain at the table.
>
> This patch adds two more hooks from check_bandwidth() and
> reset_bandwidth(), and make mtk-xhci to releases all failed endpoints
> from reset_bandwidth().
>
> Fixes: 0cbd4b34cda9 ("xhci: mediatek: support MTK xHCI host controller")
> Signed-off-by: Ikjoon Jang <ikjn@...omium.org>
Shouldn't this be the first patch in the series? You don't want a fix
to be dependent on code style changes, otherwise it is really really
hard to backport it to older kernels that might need this fix, right?
Can you re-order these patches please?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists