On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 23:09:46 +0530 Anant Thazhemadam wrote:
> Currently, __usbnet_{read|write}_cmd() use usb_control_msg().
> However, this could lead to potential partial reads/writes being
> considered valid, and since most of the callers of
> usbnet_{read|write}_cmd() don't take partial reads/writes into account
> (only checking for negative error number is done), and this can lead to
> issues.
>
> However, the new usb_control_msg_{send|recv}() APIs don't allow partial
> reads and writes.
> Using the new APIs also relaxes the return value checking that must
> be done after usbnet_{read|write}_cmd() is called.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anant Thazhemadam <anant.thazhemadam@xxxxxxxxx>
So you're changing the semantics without updating the callers?
I'm confused.
Is this supposed to be applied to some tree which already has the
callers fixed?
At a quick scan at least drivers/net/usb/plusb.c* would get confused
as it compares the return value to zero and 0 used to mean "nothing
transferred", now it means "all good", no?
* I haven't looked at all the other callers
