Am Montag, den 21.09.2020, 17:16 +0200 schrieb Johan Hovold:
> > > interface? By hardcoding the data-interface number to be the one and
> > > only interface, you'd end up probing for a "combined" interface also
> > > with a broken call-management descriptor.
> >
> > Well, by the changelog assuming a combined interface caused an oops.
> > Thence I am forced to conclude that the davices _has_ a separate
> > data interface, but no union descriptor.
>
> No, the oops was probably due to the missing sanity check later added by
> 403dff4e2c94 ("USB: cdc-acm: check for valid interfaces").
>
> With a broken call-management descriptor pointing to a non-existent
> interface we'd oops before that commit.
Hi,
maybe I am dense, but a patch that comes after a patch that is said to
fix something? Furthermore that patch would not come it work,
it would merely make probe() fail cleanly. If I read the changelog
correctly, the change makes the device work.
Regards
Oliver
