Hi, On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:05:38PM -0700, Shawn N wrote: > This is failing because our EC_CMD_GET_PROTOCOL_INFO host command is > getting messed up, or the reply buffer is getting corrupted somehow. > > ec_dev->proto_version = > min(EC_HOST_REQUEST_VERSION, > fls(proto_info->protocol_versions) - 1); > > If proto_info->protocol_versions == 0 then ec_dev->proto_version will > be assigned 0xffff. The logic here seems strange to me, if the EC is Whoops... > successfully replying to our v3 command then obviously it supports v3 > (maybe it will be useful someday if EC_HOST_REQUEST_VERSION is rev'd). > Anyway, we need to figure out what is happening with our > EC_HOST_REQUEST_VERSION host command. > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 05:39:56PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote: > >> On 19/09/17 15:09, Shawn N wrote: ... > > Furthermore, the only assignments to this 'proto_version' field look > > like they're only writing one of 0, 2, 3, or > > > > min(EC_HOST_REQUEST_VERSION, fls(proto_info->protocol_versions) - 1) > > > > . I don't see where 0xffff comes from. ...I'm an idiot. While the rvalue (the expression above) is an int (e.g, -1), it's getting cast into a uint16_t (ec_dev->proto_version). So that's where the 0xffff can come from. Sorry if I misled you Shawn :( Brian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
