Hi, On 11/21/23 16:25, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 1:53 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Right after this loop, you have: >>> >>> if (ret) >>> return ret; >>> >>> That will return with the mutex held. It needs to be a "goto >>> abort_reset". You'd also need to init `use_override` then, I think. >> >> Ah, good catch, I will fix this for the next version. >> >> Assuming there will be a next version. Did you read the cover-letter >> part about the moving of the wait for reset to after the descriptor >> read not fixing the missing reset ack 100% but rather only 50% or >> so of the time ? >> >> And do you have any opinion on if we should still move forward with >> this patch-set or not ? > > I'd tend to leave it to your judgement. I have a bias towards landing > it because it improves probe speed in a way that matches what the spec > suggests and, IMO, probe speed is important. I'm tending towards still merging this myself too. So when I've some time I'll address your remarks and post a non RFC v3. Regards, Hans
