Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, 17 May 2019, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> Wow I got a little distracted but now I am back to this. >> >> Using your test program I was able to test the basics of this. >> >> I found one bug in my patch where I was missing a memset. So I have >> corrected that, and reorganized the patch a little bit. >> >> I have not figured out how to trigger a usb disconnect so I have not >> tested that. > > Heh. Assuming the device file you tell the test program to use > corresponds to an actual USB device, you can trigger a disconnect by > literally unplugging the USB cable. (Add a 10-second delay to the > program to give yourself enough time.) I have just been running this in qemu. But yes. I suppose the easy way would be to print a message asking the usb device to be unplugged and then just wait for the signal. I might try that. >> The big thing I have not been able to test is running a 64bit big-endian >> kernel with a 32bit user space. My modified version of your test >> program should report "Bad" without my patch, and should report "Good" >> with it. >> >> Is there any chance you can test that configuration? I could not figure >> out how to get a 64bit big-endian system running in qemu, and I don't >> have the necessary hardware so I was not able to test that at all. As >> that is the actual bug I am still hoping someone can test it. > > Unfortunately, I don't have any big-endian systems either. That probably explains why the breakage in big-endian was never noticed. I am starting to wonder if anyone is actually doing big-endian for new systems anymore. Eric
