On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 2:13 PM Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 10/8/2019 1:31 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 04:13:11PM -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote: > >> In case of master pending state, it should not trigger the master > >> command because this H/W is sharing the same data buffer for slave > >> and master operations, so this commit fixes the issue with making > >> the master command triggering happen when the state goes to active > >> state. > > > > nit: Makes sense, but can you explain what might happen without your > > change? > > If we don't use this fix, a master command could corrupt data in the > shared buffer if H/W is still on processing slave operation at the > timing. Right, can you add that to the commit message? Is this trivially reproducible? We might want to submit this separately as a bugfix. Actually yeah, can you send this separately as a bugfix? I think we might want to include this in 5.4. Wolfram and Joel, what do you think?
