On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Some touchscreens have buggy firmware which claims
> remote wakeup to be enabled after a reset. They nevertheless
> crash if the feature is cleared by the host.
> Add a check for reset resume before checking for
> an enabled remote wakeup feature. On compliant
> devices the feature must be cleared after a reset anyway.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/usb/core/hub.c | 10 ++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> index 1af04bd..ded05b0 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> @@ -2899,7 +2899,7 @@ int usb_port_suspend(struct usb_device *udev, pm_message_t msg)
> static int finish_port_resume(struct usb_device *udev)
> {
> int status = 0;
> - u16 devstatus;
> + u16 devstatus = 0;
What's the reason for this change?
> /* caller owns the udev device lock */
> dev_dbg(&udev->dev, "%s\n",
> @@ -2944,7 +2944,13 @@ static int finish_port_resume(struct usb_device *udev)
> if (status) {
> dev_dbg(&udev->dev, "gone after usb resume? status %d\n",
> status);
> - } else if (udev->actconfig) {
> + /*
> + * There are a few quirky devices which violate the standard
> + * by claiming to have remote wakeup enabled after a reset,
> + * which crash if the feature is cleared, hence check for
> + * udev->reset_resume
> + */
> + } else if (udev->actconfig && !udev->reset_resume) {
> le16_to_cpus(&devstatus);
> if (devstatus & (1 << USB_DEVICE_REMOTE_WAKEUP)) {
> status = usb_control_msg(udev,
Apart from that hunk,
Acked-by: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
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
