From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47A6C2D0DB for ; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:16:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8520E206D4 for ; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:16:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=ivitera.com header.i=@ivitera.com header.b="j2MhxV65"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=ivitera.com header.i=@ivitera.com header.b="j2MhxV65" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730379AbgAXMQp (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jan 2020 07:16:45 -0500 Received: from cable.insite.cz ([84.242.75.189]:54102 "EHLO cable.insite.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730275AbgAXMQp (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jan 2020 07:16:45 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cable.insite.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB85A1A40B07; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 13:16:41 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=ivitera.com; s=mail; t=1579868201; bh=L01J8jxK50mtP80y/7F4UYp0RJAINpEbN3MrdXYjrSo=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=j2MhxV65Rw/6S5DLR0IgT+LQsh+I9P89s+Spwv72hZmyK+ejxjVyWpadQZ+3E2q5m 7bjTohw77WTzOwr3zO8xR/QJoAzEVth8LI840+Af03vt4yVseyGADaWDbJfIt42ZUN OKTiuR9AEz+9G6SDfYufRxOnwifA6kY64hBeL5qs= Received: from cable.insite.cz ([84.242.75.189]) by localhost (server.insite.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wB9GSccwqEa3; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 13:16:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.100.32] (unknown [192.168.100.32]) (Authenticated sender: pavel) by cable.insite.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A6C85A1A40B02; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 13:16:41 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=ivitera.com; s=mail; t=1579868201; bh=L01J8jxK50mtP80y/7F4UYp0RJAINpEbN3MrdXYjrSo=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=j2MhxV65Rw/6S5DLR0IgT+LQsh+I9P89s+Spwv72hZmyK+ejxjVyWpadQZ+3E2q5m 7bjTohw77WTzOwr3zO8xR/QJoAzEVth8LI840+Af03vt4yVseyGADaWDbJfIt42ZUN OKTiuR9AEz+9G6SDfYufRxOnwifA6kY64hBeL5qs= Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: u_audio: Fix high-speed max packet size From: Pavel Hofman To: John Keeping Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Felipe Balbi References: <4f2df2bc-e208-fffb-48e2-3e14cd093103@ivitera.com> <60bf144a-2039-8832-b6f1-f972de6a6846@ivitera.com> <20200114200450.064cd521.john@metanate.com> <24f0935d-16a7-4301-78f4-fa459e356ca9@ivitera.com> <20200117104022.5bb769f2.john@metanate.com> <495ccd06-9059-2249-ce70-aa9647609319@ivitera.com> Message-ID: <9607a759-c08c-97bd-a0a7-f506ca64435f@ivitera.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 13:16:41 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <495ccd06-9059-2249-ce70-aa9647609319@ivitera.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-usb-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org Dne 19. 01. 20 v 15:53 Pavel Hofman napsal(a): > > Dne 17. 01. 20 v 11:40 John Keeping napsal(a): >> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 16:39:50 +0100 >> Pavel Hofman wrote: >> >>>> I've taken a look at this and the patch below fixes it in my simple >>>> testing.  But note that this doesn't adjust the PCM's min_period_bytes >>>> which will be necessary if you want to minimize latency with an >>>> adjusted >>>> high-speed bInterval setting. >>> >>> Please can I ask you to submit your patch? IMO your perhaps slightly >>> suboptimal solution is much better than the current broken version. >> >> Yes, the patch is definitely an improvement.  I thought it would be >> picked up from the earlier mail, but I think Patchwork requires the >> subject to match, so I'm including it again here. >> >> Are you able to provide a Tested-by for this change? > > > Testing looks OK, thanks a lot! > > Tested-by: Pavel Hofman  > Please may I ask for finishing the patch submittal procedure, when it is already prepared and useful? Thanks a lot, Pavel.