Hi Mika, On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 2:02 AM Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:16:00PM -0700, Prashant Malani wrote: > > Hi Mika, > > > > Sorry for the late comment.. > > Sorry for the late reply, was on vacation ;-) > > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 05:26:37PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > USB3 tunneling is possible only over USB4 link so don't create USB3 > > > tunnels if that's not the case. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c | 3 +++ > > > drivers/thunderbolt/tb.h | 2 ++ > > > drivers/thunderbolt/tb_regs.h | 1 + > > > drivers/thunderbolt/usb4.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++--- > > > 4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c b/drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c > > > index 55daa7f1a87d..2da82259e77c 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c > > > +++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c > > > @@ -235,6 +235,9 @@ static int tb_tunnel_usb3(struct tb *tb, struct tb_switch *sw) > > > if (!up) > > > return 0; > > > > > > + if (!sw->link_usb4) > > > + return 0; > > On both here and the previous "up" check; should we be returning 0? > > Wouldn't it be better to return an appropriate error code? It sounds > > like 0 is considered a success.... > > The idea here is that you can call this function for every type of > router (can be one without USB3 adapters so TBT 3,1,2) and it creates > the tunnel if conditions for USB3 tunneling are met. It is not > considered an error. > > However, if the operations fail for some reason we return appropriate > error code. Got it. Thanks for the explanation! BR, -Prashant
