On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 09:15:43PM -0500, Dan Vacura wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 08:50:03AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > On 10/18/22 03:54, Dan Vacura wrote:
> > > With the re-use of the previous completion status in 0d1c407b1a749
> > > ("usb: dwc3: gadget: Return proper request status") it could be possible
> > > that the next frame would also get dropped if the current frame has a
> > > missed isoc error. Ensure that an interrupt is requested for the start
> > > of a new frame.
> > >
> >
> > Shouldn't the subject line says [PATCH v3 1/6]?
>
> Yes. Clerical error on my side not updating this after resolving a
> check-patch error... Not sure if it matters as this patch can exist on
> it's own. Or if I can send this again with fixed subject line, but that
> may confuse others, since there's no code difference.
Our tools (b4) will complain it can not find patch 1 in the series, so
yes, please resend with them properly numbered so that we can find them
all when going to apply them to the tree.
thanks,
greg k-h
