From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: Gadget regression with enabling of MUSB babble interrupt handling Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 04:24:56 -0700 Message-ID: <20140619112455.GE29055@atomide.com> References: <20140619095655.GA29055@atomide.com> <53A2B6B0.2040804@zonque.org> <20140619103100.GB29055@atomide.com> <53A2BD34.1060409@zonque.org> <20140619104324.GC29055@atomide.com> <53A2C06D.1000705@zonque.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:63842 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932503AbaFSLY6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2014 07:24:58 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53A2C06D.1000705@zonque.org> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Mack Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Felipe Balbi , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, george.cherian@ti.com * Daniel Mack [140619 03:51]: > On 06/19/2014 12:43 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Daniel Mack [140619 03:38]: > >> On 06/19/2014 12:31 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >>> * Daniel Mack [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