On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 19:50:05 +0200 Michal Suchánek <msucha...@suse.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 18:58:54 +0200 > Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > > > On 7/2/19 4:22 PM, Michal Suchánek wrote: > > > On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 15:11:07 +0200 > > > Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > > > > > >> On 7/2/19 3:04 PM, Michal Suchánek wrote: > > >>> On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 13:58:30 +0200 > > >>> Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> On 7/1/19 5:56 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > > >>>>> Causes unbound key repeat on error otherwise. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Suchanek <msucha...@suse.de> > > >>>>> --- > > >>>>> common/usb_kbd.c | 7 +++---- > > >>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> diff --git a/common/usb_kbd.c b/common/usb_kbd.c > > >>>>> index cc99c6be0720..948f9fd68490 100644 > > >>>>> --- a/common/usb_kbd.c > > >>>>> +++ b/common/usb_kbd.c > > >>>>> @@ -339,10 +339,9 @@ static inline void usb_kbd_poll_for_event(struct > > >>>>> usb_device *dev) > > >>>>> struct usb_kbd_pdata *data = dev->privptr; > > >>>>> > > >>>>> /* Submit a interrupt transfer request */ > > >>>>> - usb_submit_int_msg(dev, data->intpipe, &data->new[0], > > >>>>> data->intpktsize, > > >>>>> - data->intinterval); > > >>>>> - > > >>>>> - usb_kbd_irq_worker(dev); > > >>>>> + if (!usb_submit_int_msg(dev, data->intpipe, &data->new[0], > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Shouldn't you propagate return value from this function ? It can return > > >>>> ENOTSUPP. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> If it did then probing keyboard would fail and we would not get here. > > >>> > > >> > > >> So there is no chance this function could return an error here, ever ? > > >> E.g. what if it's implemented and someone yanks the keyboard cable out > > >> just at the right time ? > > > > > > It returns errors all the time with dwc2. That's why we need to check > > > for the error condition. We should not get here if probing the keyboard > > > failed, though. So if the function is not supported we will not get > > > here. Anyway, if it's not supported or the keyboard is missing it by > > > definition cannot provide useful result so we should not process it. > > > > Except you start ignoring the error value from e.g. malfunctioning > > keyboard here, instead of propagating it, correct ? > > It was never propagated to start with. The return value was not checked > at all. What I do here is check the return value and not process the > data on error whatever it contains (like the keypress returned last > time valid data was received). Maybe the error here is using usb_kbd_irq_worker rather than usb_kbd_irq which checks some status before calling usb_kbd_irq_worker. Nonetheless, checking the return value from usb_submit_int_msg works for me. Thanks Michal _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
