Re: Gadget regression with enabling of MUSB babble interrupt handling

[Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>]

* Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> [140619 03:51]:
> On 06/19/2014 12:43 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> [140619 03:38]:
> >> On 06/19/2014 12:31 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >>> * Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org> [140619 03:10]:
> >>>> On 06/19/2014 11:56 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> 
> >>> But that also raises a question: Were these patches merged for
> >>> v3.16 ever even tested in peripheral mode?
> >>
> >> At the time, I had no such hardware to test this on, so I was hoping for
> >> more testers to give them a try in different environments, which
> >> apparently didn't happen. It fixed a dead USB port condition on
> >> host-mode enabled hardware, though.
> > 
> > Well we probably should not merge patches without proper acks and
> > tested-by:s in general as things just seem to keep breaking
> > constantly otherwise. And things not working will keep people from
> > using linux next which will lead into even less testing..
> 
> I'm fairly sure the patch causing your trouble has been in linux-next
> for a while before they hit the merge window, so people with gadget
> enabled musb could have noticed the breakage early enough. The feedback
> rate for patches to this driver posted to linux-usb is also usually low,
> unfortunately.

Right but the problem is that people are not touching linux next
because it's constantly broken :)
 
> Anyway, breaking things is certainly not good, and I'm sorry for that.
> I'm just uncertain what detail in the procedure should be tweaked in
> order to prevent that from happening in the future.

Well I guess somebody should run basic tests on this driver in
linux next, that would probably solve the issues.

Regards,

Tony