On 26 May 2016 at 17:45, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > <trim> > >>> Also note that the usb_endpoint_xfer_isoc() call on line 2067 of >>> gadget.c (as in my testing/next from today) won't even get executed, so >>> we're safe there. >> >> Never will be executed? then we can remove the >> usb_endpoint_xfer_isoc() (line 2025) at risk? >> >> 2023 clean_busy = dwc3_cleanup_done_reqs(dwc, dep, event, status); >> 2024 if (clean_busy && (is_xfer_complete || >> 2025 >> usb_endpoint_xfer_isoc(dep->endpoint.desc))) >> 2026 dep->flags &= ~DWC3_EP_BUSY; > > hmm, now that I look at this again, in case of XferInProgress, we could > still have a problem. > > I'll fix it up in that commit I pointed you to. Great. Thanks. > > -- > balbi -- Baolin.wang Best Regards -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
