On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 02:55:45PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:

On Tuesday, September 14, 2021 11:32:58 AM CEST Dan Carpenter wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 08:10:01PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:

quoted

+	if (status == (-ESHUTDOWN || -ENODEV || -ENOENT)) {

	if (status == -ESHUTDOWN ||
	    status == -ENODEV ||
	    status == -ENOENT) {

This is a stupid mistake and Pavel soon noticed it. Yesterday I sent a 
message to ask reviewers for disregarding v4 and wait for v5 with the fix of 
this test. :(

There wasn't enough information in the email to know what issue you had
seen.  I had already started reviewing it when I saw the email.

However, I noticed that usb_control_msg_recv() might return in "status" some 
recoverable errors (like -ENOMEM and others); so I guess that the code must 
retry in a while loop (exactly as it did with usb_control_msg() in 
usbctrl_vendorreq()). 

I would not add a while loop unless testing shows it is required.

regards,
dan carpenter