Hello. David Brownell wrote:
Could you take another whack at this, and include set_wedge()?
You mean implementing set_wedge()? I thinkl this should be in another patch.
OK, but in that case I'd like to see that one first, then see what issues remain.
Frankly speaking, I don't see how implementing set_wedge() may influence the issues which this patch tries to deal with, namely:
- abortion of requests queued while EP is halted; - starting OUT transfers despite EP is halted.
I'll give this an eyeballing anyway, on the grounds that at least some parts of this are probably right already ... just, the mass storage support can't be exactly correct.
Why? Is set_wedge() required now?
Stricter conformance to the mass storage class spec is the reason for set_wedge(). This patch was described as aiding such conformance.
Ah, OK, thanks for clarification. I'm seeing that the file-storage gadget is the only oince calling set_wedge() method.
Now, it's clear there is one inherent issue in the current code: no set_wedge(). My eventual eyeballing will be because I suspect there may be other issues too.
There surely are, hence the patch.
See, I ran the USBCV tests last week -- not on file_storage, just standard tests, on gadget zero -- and the current code passed those just fine. So to that extent, what's needed is will be something specific to mass storage support.
I'm not sure it's specific enough...
- Dave
WBR, Sergei -- 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
