Re: [PATCH 0/6] usb: Add Clear_TT_Buffer support for XHCI

[Jim Lin]

Thanks for review.

Abandon this series of patches.

And will send out another minimized patch later.

Jim


On 2019å04æ26æ 23:34, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Jim Lin wrote:
>
> > Jim Lin (6):
> >    usb: hub:Extend usb_hub_clear_tt_buffer parameter
> >    usb: isp1760:Adjusted for usb_hub_clear_tt_buffer
> >    usb: fotg210:Adjusted for usb_hub_clear_tt_buffer
> >    usb: ehci: Adjusted for usb_hub_clear_tt_buffer
> >    usb: dwc2: Adjusted for usb_hub_clear_tt_buffer
> >    usb: xhci: Add Clear_TT_Buffer
> >
> >   drivers/usb/core/hub.c            |  5 +++--
> >   drivers/usb/dwc2/hcd_intr.c       |  2 +-
> >   drivers/usb/host/ehci-q.c         |  2 +-
> >   drivers/usb/host/fotg210-hcd.c    |  2 +-
> >   drivers/usb/host/xhci-ring.c      | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   drivers/usb/host/xhci.c           |  7 +++++++
> >   drivers/usb/host/xhci.h           |  3 +++
> >   drivers/usb/isp1760/isp1760-hcd.c |  5 +++--
> >   include/linux/usb/hcd.h           |  2 +-
> >   9 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> This doesn't explain anything.  After reading the patches, I could see
> that patches 2-5 are needed in order to work with patch 1, but I don't
> know why patch 1 was needed in the first place.  It looks like patch 1
> forces callers to add an extra argument containing information that is
> already available, so why is the extra argument needed?
>
> In any case, this is the sort of the thing you should explain to people
> instead of forcing them to figure it out for themselves.
>
> Alan Stern
--nvpublic