From: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>
To: Cole Munz <Munzzyy1@proton.me>
Cc: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] usb: dwc3: gadget: don't error on dequeue of a completed request
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2026 01:22:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aptrIbp-p6RNGd9X@vbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260905000240.2267367-1-Munzzyy1@proton.me>
On Sat, Sep 05, 2026, Cole Munz wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2026, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
> > NAK.
> >
> > This is not a fix. This changes the dequeue() behavior. You're breaking
> > the documented behavior of usb_ep_dequeue():
>
> You're right, the return value is documented and I shouldn't change it.
>
> The part that actually hurts is the dev_err. f_fs dequeues ep0req on
> every teardown on purpose since ce405d561b02, so every unbind logs
>
> dwc3 23000000.usb: request 00000000ad92f1c4 was not queued to ep0out
>
> for a request that completed normally, and that noise buries real
> errors. Would you take a version that keeps the -EINVAL return and only
> lowers the message to dev_dbg when the request is COMPLETED on its own
> endpoint? The never-queued and wrong-endpoint cases would keep the
> dev_err.
>
> If that's not worth doing either, I'll drop it.
>
Why is functionfs_unbind() calling usb_ep_dequeue() unconditionally
after the request has already completed?
The change ce405d561b02 looks like a workaround for a different issue.
Maybe the fix belongs in f_fs instead of dwc3?
BR,
Thinh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-05 1:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-04 16:13 [PATCH RESEND] usb: dwc3: gadget: don't error on dequeue of a completed request Cole Munz
2026-09-04 16:16 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-09-04 16:58 ` [PATCH v2] " Cole Munz
2026-09-04 17:07 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-09-04 20:00 ` [PATCH v3] " Cole Munz
2026-09-04 23:30 ` Thinh Nguyen
2026-09-05 0:02 ` Cole Munz
2026-09-05 1:22 ` Thinh Nguyen [this message]
2026-09-05 2:03 ` Cole Munz
2026-09-11 23:39 ` Thinh Nguyen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aptrIbp-p6RNGd9X@vbox \
--to=thinh.nguyen@synopsys.com \
--cc=Munzzyy1@proton.me \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.