On Mon, 2011-08-29 at 14:52 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 11:03:28AM +0800, Andiry Xu wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 19:10 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > > Note that the mask does not include the warm port reset bit (PORT_WRC). > > > When I applied the attached patch to include the warm port reset bit > > > change in the mask on top of Andiry's patch (plus the modifications I > > > made), the USB core did clear the BH reset change. > > > > > > When I reverted Andiry's patch, and applied my mask bit patch, the USB > > > core cleared the BH reset fine. I think we should go with the simpler > > > fix for 3.1 and the stable trees, and maybe Andiry's patch (modified to > > > remove the clearing of the change bits) should be queued for 3.2. > > > > > > > OK, but I'm wondering why the usbcore will report BH reset change for me > > even without the two patches. > > Maybe the host controller you're testing on reports another change bit > being set at the same time as the BH reset change? Perhaps a link state > change? It could be just a hardware implementation difference. > > Any objections to me queueing this patch (minus the comment about port > reset) for 3.1? > I'm OK with it. Thanks, Andiry -- 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
