> > --- a/drivers/usb/core/usb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/core/usb.c
> > @@ -925,7 +925,7 @@ int usb_string(struct usb_device *dev, int index, char
> > *buf, size_t size)
> > goto error;
> > } else {
> > dev->have_langid = -1;
> > - dev->string_langid = tbuf[2] | (tbuf[3] << 8);
> > + dev->string_langid = le16_to_cpu(*((__le16 *)&buf[2]));
>
> You also changed from tbuf to buf. Is this intentional?
Good catch,
No this is not intentional it should still be `tbuf` here, `buf` name
must be used when applying patch number 6, here it will cause an error
as buf is a pointer the output string not the result of the usb request.
Jules
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
