On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Mario Jorge Isidoro
<Mario.Isidoro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Fabio,
>
> I tried 3.4 and you were right, it still works fine.
>
> For the 'struct at91_ep' has no member named 'desc' error I tried commenting the offending declaration (|| ep->desc)
> and it builds without any error. During the bisect run this happened several times and I think, but am not sure, that some of
> this attempts worked fine without displaying the original error.
I'm happy to say that with the v3.5-rc6, after reverting the commit
f3d8bf34c2c925867322197096ed501ceab8085a and
removing the following line:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/at91_udc.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/at91_udc.c
index 7687ccd..98339a2 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/gadget/at91_udc.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/at91_udc.c
@@ -475,7 +475,6 @@ static int at91_ep_enable(struct usb_ep *_ep,
unsigned long flags;
if (!_ep || !ep
- || !desc || ep->ep.desc
|| _ep->name == ep0name
|| desc->bDescriptorType != USB_DT_ENDPOINT
|| (maxpacket = usb_endpoint_maxp(desc)) == 0
Now the at91_udc driver with g_ether it's working again.
I don't understand the reason, but now it seems to work fine.
If there isn't a better solution i propose to revert the commit
f3d8bf34c2c925867322197096ed501ceab8085a
and remove the line on the at91_udc driver.
Best regards
--
Fabio Porcedda
--
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
