From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Pengfei Lv" <lvpengfei20@huawei.com>
Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] usb: core: hub: Re-guess ep0 maxpacket size on reset
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2026 03:34:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-200650@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261106031625.1824732-1-lvpengfei20@huawei.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] usb: core: hub: usb_ep0_reinit() on unaddressed xHCI slot in hub_port_init()
--
commit d0ddaa8105de736e42e89c86a81968c860e72871
Author: Pengfei Lv <lvpengfei20@huawei.com>
usb: core: hub: Re-guess ep0 maxpacket size on reset
This commit removes the initial guard around the ep0 maxpacket size guess in
hub_port_init() and calls usb_ep0_reinit() on reset so that full-speed devices
with bMaxPacketSize0 < 64 have their ep0 maxpacket reset to 64 in both USB
core and the xHCI ep0 context before re-enumeration issues a 64-byte
GET_DESCRIPTOR request.
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> index 199d3f535a891..a6c260d390945 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> @@ -4969,33 +4969,34 @@ hub_port_init(struct usb_hub *hub, struct usb_device *udev, int port1,
> }
> oldspeed = udev->speed;
>
> - if (initial) {
> - /* USB 2.0 section 5.5.3 talks about ep0 maxpacket ...
> - * it's fixed size except for full speed devices.
> + /* USB 2.0 section 5.5.3 talks about ep0 maxpacket ...
> + * it's fixed size except for full speed devices.
> + */
> + switch (udev->speed) {
> + case USB_SPEED_SUPER_PLUS:
> + case USB_SPEED_SUPER:
> + udev->ep0.desc.wMaxPacketSize = cpu_to_le16(512);
> + break;
> + case USB_SPEED_HIGH: /* fixed at 64 */
> + udev->ep0.desc.wMaxPacketSize = cpu_to_le16(64);
> + break;
> + case USB_SPEED_FULL: /* 8, 16, 32, or 64 */
> + /* to determine the ep0 maxpacket size, try to read
> + * the device descriptor to get bMaxPacketSize0 and
> + * then correct our initial guess.
> */
> - switch (udev->speed) {
> - case USB_SPEED_SUPER_PLUS:
> - case USB_SPEED_SUPER:
> - udev->ep0.desc.wMaxPacketSize = cpu_to_le16(512);
> - break;
> - case USB_SPEED_HIGH: /* fixed at 64 */
> - udev->ep0.desc.wMaxPacketSize = cpu_to_le16(64);
> - break;
> - case USB_SPEED_FULL: /* 8, 16, 32, or 64 */
> - /* to determine the ep0 maxpacket size, try to read
> - * the device descriptor to get bMaxPacketSize0 and
> - * then correct our initial guess.
> - */
> - udev->ep0.desc.wMaxPacketSize = cpu_to_le16(64);
> - break;
> - case USB_SPEED_LOW: /* fixed at 8 */
> - udev->ep0.desc.wMaxPacketSize = cpu_to_le16(8);
> - break;
> - default:
> - goto fail;
> - }
> + udev->ep0.desc.wMaxPacketSize = cpu_to_le16(64);
> + break;
> + case USB_SPEED_LOW: /* fixed at 8 */
> + udev->ep0.desc.wMaxPacketSize = cpu_to_le16(8);
> + break;
> + default:
> + goto fail;
> }
>
> + if (!initial)
> + usb_ep0_reinit(udev);
[Severity: Medium]
Can calling usb_ep0_reinit(udev) here before hub_enable_device() or
hub_set_address() trigger an invalid Evaluate Context command when the xHCI
slot has been newly allocated during reset?
Earlier in drivers/usb/core/hub.c:hub_port_init(), hub_port_reset() invokes
hcd->driver->reset_device(), which resolves to
drivers/usb/host/xhci.c:xhci_discover_or_reset_device(). When the xHCI slot
was freed and reallocated via xhci_alloc_dev() (for example on Etron hosts
with XHCI_ETRON_HOST, or after host controller power loss / reset on resume),
the newly allocated virt_dev has a zeroed out_ctx in SLOT_STATE_DISABLED
because Address Device (xhci_setup_device()) has not run yet:
drivers/usb/host/xhci.c:xhci_discover_or_reset_device() {
...
slot_ctx = xhci_get_slot_ctx(xhci, virt_dev->out_ctx);
if (GET_SLOT_STATE(le32_to_cpu(slot_ctx->dev_state)) ==
SLOT_STATE_DISABLED)
return 0;
if (xhci->quirks & XHCI_ETRON_HOST) {
ret = xhci_disable_and_free_slot(xhci, udev->slot_id);
if (!ret) {
ret = xhci_alloc_dev(hcd, udev);
...
}
When usb_ep0_reinit(udev) is then called for a full-speed device via
usb_enable_endpoint() -> usb_hcd_reset_endpoint() -> xhci_endpoint_reset() ->
xhci_check_ep0_maxpacket(), neither xhci_endpoint_reset() nor
xhci_check_ep0_maxpacket() checks whether vdev->out_ctx is still in
SLOT_STATE_DISABLED:
drivers/usb/host/xhci.c:xhci_check_ep0_maxpacket() {
...
ep_ctx = xhci_get_ep_ctx(xhci, vdev->out_ctx, 0);
hw_max_packet_size = MAX_PACKET_DECODED(le32_to_cpu(ep_ctx->ep_info2));
max_packet_size = usb_endpoint_maxp(&vdev->udev->ep0.desc);
if (hw_max_packet_size == max_packet_size)
return 0;
...
}
Because vdev->out_ctx is still zeroed, hw_max_packet_size is 0 != 64, so
xhci_check_ep0_maxpacket() copies the zeroed out_ctx ep0 into in_ctx ep0 and
issues an Evaluate Context command on an unaddressed slot in the Enabled
state, which the xHC rejects with COMP_CONTEXT_STATE_ERROR (logging a warning
in xhci_evaluate_context_result()).
Furthermore, if a previous attempt in xhci_setup_device() failed with
COMP_USB_TRANSACTION_ERROR, it reallocates the slot via xhci_alloc_dev() and
calls xhci_setup_addressable_virt_dev(xhci, udev), which populates
vdev->in_ctx (including setting slot_ctx->dev_info and initializing in_ctx
ep0) while vdev->out_ctx remains zeroed. If hub_port_init() retries and calls
usb_ep0_reinit(udev) before the next xhci_setup_device(),
xhci_check_ep0_maxpacket() overwrites vdev->in_ctx ep0 from the zeroed
vdev->out_ctx while leaving slot_ctx->dev_info non-zero:
drivers/usb/host/xhci.c:xhci_setup_device() {
...
if (!slot_ctx->dev_info)
xhci_setup_addressable_virt_dev(xhci, udev);
/* Otherwise, update the control endpoint ring enqueue pointer. */
else
xhci_copy_ep0_dequeue_into_input_ctx(xhci, udev);
...
}
Wouldn't xhci_setup_device() then skip xhci_setup_addressable_virt_dev() and
submit Address Device with a zeroed ep0 context (EP_TYPE == 0)?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261106031625.1824732-1-lvpengfei20@huawei.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-06 3:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-04 12:44 [PATCH] usb: core: hub: Re-guess ep0 maxpacket size on reset Pengfei Lv
2026-11-04 12:57 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-04 14:59 ` Alan Stern
2026-11-04 17:36 ` Michal Pecio
2026-11-05 5:06 ` Alan Stern
2026-11-05 12:30 ` Michal Pecio
2026-11-05 8:41 ` Pengfei Lv
2026-11-05 15:46 ` Alan Stern
2026-11-06 3:16 ` [PATCH v2] " Pengfei Lv
2026-11-06 3:34 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-06 7:17 ` Michal Pecio
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=sashiko-outbox-200650@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lvpengfei20@huawei.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox