On 04/29/2014 06:11 AM, Julius Werner wrote:
*bump*
Sarah, Mathias, can we decide how to proceed with this? I think the
section Alan quoted is a pretty good argument in favor of my
interpretation (although of course this would not be the first time
that two sections of a spec contradict each other). But more
importantly, we have a case that just generates a clearly wrong Slot
Context right now (the one that only drops endpoints), and I see no
way how you could construct a correct Slot Context for that case with
Sarah's interpretation. We need to resolve that somehow.
We discussed with Sarah that we should try this out and queue it for
usb-linus. This clearly fixes the generation of a invalid slot context
if all endpoints are dropped.
But because there hasn't been any reported issue about the other case
this changes (always setting context entries to last valid ep in target
configuration), and spec still has this tiny contradiction in this case,
we should keep this out of stable. At least for now, until it gets some
real world testing coverage.
-Mathias
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/