David Brownell wrote: > Martin ... I lost track of this. Is some version of this patch in > Greg's queue? If not, there should be. It'd help shake out bugs > appearing in some newer HCDs. > > No it's not currently in Greg's queue. There was some discussion between you, Alan and myself about whether it is better to add extra tests, add extra checks to the existing tests or add parameters to the existing tests. I think Greg is waiting for a consensus on this before taking the patch. > Similar comment for peripheral drivers, with gadget zero... > > p.s. ISTR you also had some thoughts about getting the test script > into the kernel tree too. Ideally we'd have not just a bash script > but also the operator instructions ... but for now, I'd be glad just > to see drivers that demand word alignment start to fail in lab tests > rather than in the field... > > Yes my opinion is that we should: 1) Add extra explicit tests for alignment problems (what this patch does) I think this is superior to merging with the existing tests because it will give a clear indication of where the problem lies (one test will pass and another will fail if HCDs require alignment) 2) Put the test script in the kernel tree (to make it more likely that the new tests are called) 3) Agreed that some documentation / instructions would be good. However I'm not sure what this should really contain and the relation to the materiel available at http://www.linux-usb.org/usbtest/ If we agree about this I'll submit patches for 1 + 2. I think 3 needs more discussion. Martin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
