Re: correctly handling EPROTO

[Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>]

On 24.03.26 02:06, Thinh Nguyen wrote:


> I attached a couple of usb traffic sniffing traces. Review comments
> below.

Thank you a whole lot. These are extremely educational. I am not sure
to which extent this discussion is on topic. Though it makes me wonder
how we'd deal with an error in the last phase of the command. We'd
be unsure whether it has been completed.

> Yes it must. I was responding to Alan's comment that noting that it can
> be done prior or after unlinking the URBs. But as Michal noted, that may
> not be possible because we ring the doorbell right after giving back an
> URB.

Very well. That raises a fundamental issue. Are we planning around the limits
of the existing API or according to capabilities of the hardware. I see
two specific issues

1) What do we do to URBs after the URB suffering a failure? We cannot just execute
them.
2) Do we need a second callback for an "undead" URB, which decides on how errors
are to be handled?

	Regards
		Oliver