Hi Sebastian, > >+ case USB_REQ_GET_STATUS: > >+ if (!gadget_is_superspeed(gadget)) > >+ goto unknown; > >+ if (ctrl->bRequestType != (USB_DIR_IN | > USB_RECIP_INTERFACE)) > >+ goto unknown; > >+ value = 2; /* This is the length of the get_status reply > */ > >+ *((__le16 *)req->buf) = 0; > > Mike please correct me if I'm wrong bug this looks like a case for > put_unaligned_le16(). > Is someone actually using gadget support on blackfin? I'm asking > because > config_buf() (same file, upstream) is using req->buf to build the > descriptors in place and one element is le16 which should be affected. > Mike answered that you're right in your observation. I'm not familiar with blackfin. Could you please elaborate on this? I understand that I need to use put_unaligned_le16(), will do, but I would like to better understand why and if there is a way to test this so that blackfin won't be broken. Best regards, Tanya Brokhman Consultant for Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
