On Mon, 5 Jan 2026 at 19:00, Laurent Pinchart <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 04:29:24PM +0100, Ricardo Ribalda wrote: > > Hi Ralf > > > > Thanks for the bisect and the report. > > > > > > The patch to remove noprod parameter has been queued for 6.20 :S so we > > should look into a more permanent fix soon. > > > > When you say zoom, do you mean the desktop version of zoom ( > > https://zoom.us/download?os=linux ) or the web version > > I would assume that it is the zoom app, that is ignoring the "error" > > flag from the frames and showing them to the users. Can you confirm > > that? Hopefully we can reach zoom and they can fix it. > > Should we revert the nodrop removal in the meantime ?
I think if we have not heard back from zoom by rc6 we should revert. But IMO we should wait until then. Maybe we can find more users of nodrop that way. > > > Now about the error flag. I have given a fast look at your usb trace > > and have only seen 4 frames with "error bits" [1]. Can you add more > > tracing? > > Do something like: > > rmmod uvcvideo > > modprobe uvcvideo trace=0xffffffff > > > > Then start zoom, trigger the error and share the content of your > > dmesg. It should contain an explanation of why the driver thinks that > > the frames are invalid. > > > > Thanks! > > > > [1] I used this filter in wireshark: usb.iso.data[1]!=0x0d && > > usb.iso.data[1]!=0x0c && usb.iso.data[1]!=0x0f && > > usb.iso.data[1]!=0x0e && usb.addr == "3.34.1" > > -- > Regards, > > Laurent Pinchart -- Ricardo Ribalda
