Hi,
On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 04:54:18PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> When MISSED_ISOC is set, BUSY is also set. Since, we are handling
> MISSED_ISOC as a separate case in third scenario, therefore handle only
> BUSY but not MISSED_ISOC in second scenario.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Anand <pratyush.anand@xxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c | 3 ++-
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
> index 0ead4cd..800944f 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
> @@ -1139,7 +1139,8 @@ static int __dwc3_gadget_ep_queue(struct dwc3_ep *dep, struct dwc3_request *req)
> * core may not see the modified TRB(s).
> */
> if (usb_endpoint_xfer_isoc(dep->endpoint.desc) &&
> - (dep->flags & DWC3_EP_BUSY)) {
> + (dep->flags & DWC3_EP_BUSY) &&
> + !(dep->flags & DWC3_EP_MISSED_ISOC)) {
what about inverting the cases then ? Moving missed_isoc before ep_busy?
Would that work ? I would be more comfortable with that, I guess.
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
