Re: [PATCH -next] usb: isp1760: Fix meaningless check in isp1763_run()

["Rui Miguel Silva" <rui.silva@linaro.org>]

Hi,
Managed to test this and looks good. Everything is working as
expected.

On Fri Jun 4, 2021 at 3:09 AM WEST, tongtiangen wrote:
> On 2021/6/3 19:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 06:03:11PM +0800, Tong Tiangen wrote:
> >> There's a meaningless check in isp1763_run. According to the
> >> similar implement in isp1760_run, the proper check should remove
> >> retval = 0;

however I think a more descriptive changelog instead of comparing to
similar function would be better, maybe something around:

"Remove attribution to retval before check, which make it completely
meaningless, and does't check what it was supposed: the return
value of the timed function to set up configuration flag."

> >>
> >> Fixes: 60d789f3bfbb ("usb: isp1760: add support for isp1763")
> >> Signed-off-by: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@huawei.com>

With changelog changed you can add:
Tested-by: Rui Miguel Silva <rui.silva@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Rui Miguel Silva <rui.silva@linaro.org>

------
Cheers,
     Rui

> >> ---
> >>   drivers/usb/isp1760/isp1760-hcd.c | 1 -
> >>   1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/isp1760/isp1760-hcd.c b/drivers/usb/isp1760/isp1760-hcd.c
> >> index 016a54ea76f4..27168b4a4ef2 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/isp1760/isp1760-hcd.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/isp1760/isp1760-hcd.c
> >> @@ -1648,7 +1648,6 @@ static int isp1763_run(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
> >>   	down_write(&ehci_cf_port_reset_rwsem);
> >>   	retval = isp1760_hcd_set_and_wait(hcd, FLAG_CF, 250 * 1000);
> >>   	up_write(&ehci_cf_port_reset_rwsem);
> >> -	retval = 0;
> >>   	if (retval)
> >>   		return retval;
> >>   
> >> -- 
> >> 2.18.0.huawei.25
> >>
> > Did you test this change to verify that the driver still works properly?
> > You are now checking something that never was checked before...
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
> > .
> Sorry,  this fix was not send to Rui.
>  From the point of view of code logic, there should be a problem here. I 
> don't have the actual hardware to verify whether it works properly. Rui 
> may know if the patch affects the original workflow.
>
> thanks
> .
> >