Hi,

"Zengtao (B)" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com]
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 4:13 PM
To: Zengtao (B) <redacted>
Cc: Zengtao (B) <redacted>; Greg Kroah-Hartman
[off-list ref]; linux-usb@vger.kernel.org;
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: gadget: don't remove the request if
bus-expired

* PGP Signed by an unknown key


Hi,

Zeng Tao [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

We have already returned EAGAIN for bus-expiry, and it's designed to
start with a future Frame number and start the transfer again. So we
should not remove the request for that case.

Signed-off-by: Zeng Tao <redacted>

Do we need a Fixes tag here? How about Cc stable? Can you share
tracepoints exposing the problem?

I am not sure that we need to Fixes tag, it's not related to any single patch, but
there is definitely something wrong, after rethinking it again, I found that there
are still some problems for this patch, for the reties inside the driver, we should not
remove the request, but if we return -EAGAIN to the gadget layer, we should because
the gadget will requeue the request again if we return -EAGAIN.

Any suggestions. 

Well, that needs to be patched, sure. I'm just saying that we need to
blame a patch that was incomplete so we know which stable releases need
this. Perhaps the patch at fault here was my patch adding the retry
method for isoc transfers.