Re: [PATCH] staging: comedi: check validity of wMaxPacketSize of usb endpoints found

From: Anant Thazhemadam <anant.thazhemadam@gmail.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
	syzbot+009f546aa1370056b1c2@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
	Ian Abbott <abbotti@mev.co.uk>,
	linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: comedi: check validity of wMaxPacketSize of usb endpoints found
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2020 13:56:27 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0abda8b5-a05c-814f-6230-c88e81d5a3d0@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201010080904.GA140279@kroah.com>


On 10/10/20 1:39 pm, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 07:29:13AM +0530, Anant Thazhemadam wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 10-10-2020 12:30, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 09:50:29PM +0530, Anant Thazhemadam wrote:
>>>> While finding usb endpoints in vmk80xx_find_usb_endpoints(), check if 
>>>> wMaxPacketSize = 0 for the endpoints found.
>>>>
>>>> Some devices have isochronous endpoints that have wMaxPacketSize = 0
>>>> (as required by the USB-2 spec).
>>>> However, since this doesn't apply here, wMaxPacketSize = 0 can be
>>>> considered to be invalid.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-by: syzbot+009f546aa1370056b1c2@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
>>>> Tested-by: syzbot+009f546aa1370056b1c2@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anant Thazhemadam <anant.thazhemadam@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>> You sent 2 patches with the same subject, which one is the "latest" one?
>> This patch (that you have replied to) is the "latest" one.
>>
>>> Please always version your patches and put below the --- line what
>>> changed from the previous version, so that maintainers have a chance to
>>> know which to accept...
>> The other patch (with the same subject line) wasn't supposed to be sent out.
>> I realized there was a coding style error in that while sending, and cancelled
>> sending it, but it got sent nonetheless.
>> I would have included a v2 tag in this patch itself, but I didn't realize that the
>> previous one got sent until afterwards. :(
>> I'm sorry for that.
>>
>>> Can you fix this up and send a v3?
>> Shouldn't I resend this patch as a v2 instead? Since there wouldn't be any
>> changes from v2 (this patch) to v3 otherwise (unless of course, somebody could
>> suggest some more changes that could be made to this patch itself).
> The change would be that you are correctly listing the version
> information, so it would be v3 :)
>
Understood, thank you. I will send in a v3 as advised. :)

Thanks,
Anant

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel