Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sat, 22 Jan 2022 08:24:48 +0530
From:   Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@quicinc.com>
To:     Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
CC:     Pavankumar Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@quicinc.com>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: f_sourcesink: Fix isoc transfer for
 USB_SPEED_SUPER_PLUS
Message-ID: <20220122025448.GD11385@hu-pkondeti-hyd.qualcomm.com>
References: <1642764684-26060-1-git-send-email-quic_pkondeti@quicinc.com>
 <YerMjGG8VQkI85bB@rowland.harvard.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YerMjGG8VQkI85bB@rowland.harvard.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk

Hi Alan,

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 10:09:00AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 05:01:24PM +0530, Pavankumar Kondeti wrote:
> > Currently when gadget enumerates in super speed plus, the isoc
> > endpoint request buffer size is not calculated correctly. Fix
> > this by checking the gadget speed against USB_SPEED_SUPER_PLUS
> > and update the request buffer size.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Pavankumar Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@quicinc.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_sourcesink.c | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_sourcesink.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_sourcesink.c
> > index 1abf08e..0a423ba 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_sourcesink.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_sourcesink.c
> > @@ -584,6 +584,8 @@ static int source_sink_start_ep(struct f_sourcesink *ss, bool is_in,
> >  
> >  	if (is_iso) {
> >  		switch (speed) {
> > +		case USB_SPEED_SUPER_PLUS:
> > +			fallthrough;
> 
> There's no need for this "fallthough" line.  You're allowed to have 
> multiple case labels for a single block of code.
> 
Thanks for the review. I will incorporate your suggestion in v2.

Thanks,
Pavan