On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 09:56:14AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 09:03:54AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > On 03/10/2015 10:22 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 12:25:48PM +0530, Amit Virdi wrote: > > >> +cc Sebastian, Alan Stern > > >> > > >> Hello Felipe, > > >> > > >> On 2/28/2015 3:18 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > >>> Hi Amit, > > >>> > > >>> commit ef11982dd7a657512c362242508bb4021e0d67b6 (Add support for > > >>> interrupt EP) actually broke testusb for MUSB when MUSB is the gadget. > > >>> > > >>> The reason is that we're requesting an endpoint with a 64-byte FIFO, but > > >>> later deciding to use the same endpoint with wMaxPacketSize set to 1024 > > >>> and MUSB errors out because the endpoint was selected for 64-byte only. > > >>> > > >>> This only happens when trying to set alternate setting 2 and it's pretty > > >>> easy to trigger. > > >>> > > >> > > >> This issue was brought up earlier by Sebastian. He even submitted a patch > > >> for the same and there were discussions over it. > > >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg117962.html > > >> > > >> However, things were never concluded. Using module parameters should get > > >> it > > >> working but that isn't a clean solution. > > >> > > >> What do you suggest? > > > > > > allocate endpoints based on largest wMaxPacketSize ? If we have more > > > FIFO space than needed, that's not a problem. The problem is when we > > > allocate a FIFO which is not large enough. > > > > Please either revert the patch that broke things or apply mine until > > the whole endpoint allocations is reworked so this is not an issue > > anymore. > > I'll apply your patch, but add a few comments as to why we're doing it > that way.
no, I changed my mind. I'll revert original commit. -- balbi
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
