Dear Sebastian: Please see the comments follows yours. By the way, I found the kernel is updated to 3.7.1 today. So I have to update my patch based on 3.7.1, and resubmit it? Right? Best Regards, Franko Fang > -----Original Message----- > From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [mailto:sebastian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 10:10 PM > To: Fangxiaozhi (Franko) > Cc: linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Xueguiying > (Zihan); Linlei (Lei Lin); greg@xxxxxxxxx; Yili (Neil); Wangyuhua (Roger, > Credit); Huqiao; balbi@xxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]linux-usb:optimize to match the Huawei USB > storage devices and support new switch command > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 10:44:19AM +0800, fangxiaozhi 00110321 wrote: > > diff -uprN linux-3.7_bak/drivers/usb/storage/initializers.c > linux-3.7/drivers/usb/storage/initializers.c > > --- linux-3.7_bak/drivers/usb/storage/initializers.c 2012-12-11 > 09:56:11.000000000 +0800 > > +++ linux-3.7/drivers/usb/storage/initializers.c 2012-12-17 > 11:12:12.000000000 +0800 > > US_DEBUGP("Huawei mode set result is %d\n", result); > > return 0; > > } > > + > > +/* Find the supported Huawei USB dongles */ static int > > +usb_stor_huawei_dongles_pid(struct us_data *us) { > > + struct usb_interface_descriptor *idesc; > > + int idProduct; > > + > > + idesc = &us->pusb_intf->cur_altsetting->desc; > > + idProduct = us->pusb_dev->descriptor.idProduct; > > + if (idesc && idesc->bInterfaceNumber == 0) { > > + if ((idProduct == 0x1001) > > + || (idProduct == 0x1003) > > + || (idProduct == 0x1004) > > + || (idProduct >= 0x1401 && idProduct < 0x1501) > > + || (idProduct > 0x1504 && idProduct <= 0x1600) > > + || (idProduct >= 0x1c02 && idProduct <= 0x2202)) { > > + return 1; > > + } > > + } > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static int usb_stor_huawei_scsi_init(struct us_data *us) { > > + int result = 0; > > + int act_len = 0; > > + char rewind_cmd[] = {0x11, 0x06, 0x20, 0x00, 0x00, 0x01, 0x01, 0x00, > > + 0x01, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00}; > > Has this something to do with the SPACE command as defined in SSC-2? I > don't see the code (0x6 here) to be defined. But then you name is rewind. Yes, we redefine the SPACE based on our need, and named it "rewind" > > > + struct bulk_cb_wrap *bcbw = (struct bulk_cb_wrap *) us->iobuf; > > + > > + memset(bcbw, 0, sizeof(struct bulk_cb_wrap)); > > + bcbw->Signature = cpu_to_le32(US_BULK_CB_SIGN); > > + bcbw->Tag = 0; > > + bcbw->DataTransferLength = 0; > > + bcbw->Flags = bcbw->Lun = 0; > > A memset() followed by an init of each member of the struct. Could please > chose one side? > > > + bcbw->Length = sizeof(rewind_cmd); > > + memcpy(bcbw->CDB, rewind_cmd, sizeof(rewind_cmd)); > > + > > + result = usb_stor_bulk_transfer_buf(us, us->send_bulk_pipe, &bcbw, > > + US_BULK_CS_WRAP_LEN, &act_len); > > I am a little confused here. Shouldn't this be bcbw aka us->iobuf and not > &bcbw ? Yes, you are right. > > And shouldn't you read something from the us->recv_bulk_pipe after > that? Well, because our device will re-connect to switch the ports if it receives the command. So it is not necessary to read the response of the command. > > > + US_DEBUGP("transfer actual length=%d, result=%d\n", act_len, > result); > > + return result; > > +} > > + > > Sebastian ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
