From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752181Ab0IOK3Y (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 15 Sep 2010 06:29:24 -0400
Received: from mail-ey0-f174.google.com ([209.85.215.174]:38710 "EHLO
	mail-ey0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751328Ab0IOK3X (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 15 Sep 2010 06:29:23 -0400
Message-ID: <4C909F99.9050300@mvista.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:27:37 +0400
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@mvista.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100825 Thunderbird/3.1.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: balbi@ti.com
CC: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>, "greg@kroah.com" <greg@kroah.com>,
        "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Brownell <dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net>,
        "Gadiyar, Anand" <gadiyar@ti.com>, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND/PATCH 5/6] USB: musb-gadget: complete request only if
 data is transfered over
References: <20100914065604.GD2601@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <4C8F527E.40408@ru.mvista.com> <20100914105402.GD7554@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <4C8FB60D.1080906@ru.mvista.com> <20100915065345.GC3393@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <4C909961.10001@ru.mvista.com> <20100915100553.GJ3393@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <4C909B2E.3000909@ru.mvista.com> <AANLkTi=A+1ThrRTNjWoFbXr-G1OUnpThEwG5rCgGirzC@mail.gmail.com> <4C909D87.2090901@ru.mvista.com> <20100915102256.GK3393@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100915102256.GK3393@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 15.09.2010 14:22, Felipe Balbi wrote:

>> I don't see why we should fix only this problem, while it's obvious tha
>> the fix is incomplete and leaves the other problem exposed. Please recast the
>> patch.

> IMO, the ZLP fix is *another* fix and as such subject to a different
> patch.

    IMHO, this fix as it is now is quite stupid. It's clear that the check is 
misplaced and will be removed once the ZLP fix is done. So why not do it once 
and for all? Is it so hard to do? FWIW, I NAK this patch as it is now.

WBR, Sergei