Hi Hans, Thank you for the patch. On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:48:23PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > uvc_ctrl_add_info() calls uvc_ctrl_get_flags() which will override > the fixed-up flags set by uvc_ctrl_fixup_xu_info(). > > This commit fixes this by adding a is_xu argument to uvc_ctrl_add_info() > and skipping the uvc_ctrl_get_flags() call for xu ctrls. > > Note that the xu path has already called uvc_ctrl_get_flags() from > uvc_ctrl_fill_xu_info() before calling uvc_ctrl_add_info(). > > This fixes the xu motor controls not working properly on a Logitech > 046d:08cc, and presumably also on the other Logitech models which have > a quirk for this in the uvc_ctrl_fixup_xu_info() function. > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_ctrl.c | 11 ++++++----- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_ctrl.c b/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_ctrl.c > index e399b9fad757..4bdea5814d6a 100644 > --- a/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_ctrl.c > +++ b/drivers/media/usb/uvc/uvc_ctrl.c > @@ -1815,7 +1815,7 @@ static int uvc_ctrl_fill_xu_info(struct uvc_device *dev, > } > > static int uvc_ctrl_add_info(struct uvc_device *dev, struct uvc_control *ctrl, > - const struct uvc_control_info *info); > + const struct uvc_control_info *info, bool is_xu); > > static int uvc_ctrl_init_xu_ctrl(struct uvc_device *dev, > struct uvc_control *ctrl) > @@ -1830,7 +1830,7 @@ static int uvc_ctrl_init_xu_ctrl(struct uvc_device *dev, > if (ret < 0) > return ret; > > - ret = uvc_ctrl_add_info(dev, ctrl, &info); > + ret = uvc_ctrl_add_info(dev, ctrl, &info, true); > if (ret < 0) > uvc_trace(UVC_TRACE_CONTROL, "Failed to initialize control " > "%pUl/%u on device %s entity %u\n", info.entity, > @@ -2009,7 +2009,7 @@ int uvc_ctrl_restore_values(struct uvc_device *dev) > * Add control information to a given control. > */ > static int uvc_ctrl_add_info(struct uvc_device *dev, struct uvc_control *ctrl, > - const struct uvc_control_info *info) > + const struct uvc_control_info *info, bool is_xu) > { > int ret = 0; > > @@ -2029,7 +2029,8 @@ static int uvc_ctrl_add_info(struct uvc_device *dev, struct uvc_control *ctrl, > * default flag values from the uvc_ctrl array when the device doesn't > * properly implement GET_INFO on standard controls. > */ > - uvc_ctrl_get_flags(dev, ctrl, &ctrl->info); > + if (!is_xu) > + uvc_ctrl_get_flags(dev, ctrl, &ctrl->info); Would it make sense to instead move this line (and the above comment) to uvc_ctrl_init_ctrl(), right after the uvc_ctrl_add_info() call ? If you would prefer keeping it here, I think is_xu should be renamed to update_flags (with the true/false values switched) to make it clearer. It would then also add a comment to uvc_ctrl_init_xu_ctrl() right before the call to uvc_ctrl_add_info() to state that we don't update flags to avoid overwriting the value set by uvc_ctrl_fixup_xu_info() in uvc_ctrl_fill_xu_info(). What's your preference ? > > ctrl->initialized = 1; > > @@ -2252,7 +2253,7 @@ static void uvc_ctrl_init_ctrl(struct uvc_device *dev, struct uvc_control *ctrl) > for (; info < iend; ++info) { > if (uvc_entity_match_guid(ctrl->entity, info->entity) && > ctrl->index == info->index) { > - uvc_ctrl_add_info(dev, ctrl, info); > + uvc_ctrl_add_info(dev, ctrl, info, false); > break; > } > } -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart