On 20-08-18 10:46:55, stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 10:05:51AM +0000, Peter Chen wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c
> > > > b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c index 473e74088b1f..43351b0af569
> > > > 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/core.c
> > > > @@ -1386,7 +1386,6 @@ void usb_del_gadget_udc(struct usb_gadget
> > > > *gadget) {
> > > > usb_del_gadget(gadget);
> > > > usb_put_gadget(gadget);
> > > > - memset(&gadget->dev, 0x00, sizeof(gadget->dev));
> > >
> > > Shouldn't you do this patch earlier in the series, as the
> > > usb_put_gadget() call could have freed the memory that is being cleared here?
> > >
> >
> > If I did it earlier, it would cause dwc3 break if people do 'git bisect', dwc3 issue is
> > fixed at patch 5.
>
> If you use the patch I posted earlier:
>
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmarc.info%2F%3Fl%3Dlinux-usb%26m%3D159605415210351%26w%3D2&data=02%7C01%7Cpeter.chen%40nxp.com%7C84c12532be684ba94c1708d843858e86%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7C0%7C637333588196922016&sdata=gOe5kecj38gR9qIbkfjVkNO%2FICp0bHis30Yi2tomrc8%3D&reserved=0
>
> instead of this one then dwc3 would continue to work correctly during
> the intermediate stages of the series.
>
But at last, we don't want below at .release function
memset(dev, 0, sizeof(*dev));
It still needs another patch to delete it after dwc3 changes,
and it changes .release function name to usb_udc_zero_release,
this change may also not be needed.
Or I only do move memory clear operation at the first patch, and
delete it at the last patch, it could let the reader not see
the memory clear operation at the usb_del_gadget during the patch
series.
--
Thanks,
Peter Chen
