We don't want to complicate the debug tools too much. I remember we can already set the size of the log file. That is enough. Thx Eddie

Acked-by: Eddie Dong <eddie.dong@...> This seems to be better to be "d--".

The vcpuid base on these assumption: (1) if we don't plan to support this feature, we could filter it. (2) if the leaf greater than the limit (base or enternal), we should return the value in the

I think it should be re-connection instead of disconnection, right? Currently, the native S3 will disable the vbus for all xHCI ports and re-drive during S3 resume. This behavior cause native USB

I don't see a PR for this in GitHub. Can it be submitted there for review? -- david

For "= 0" and "< 0", please define some macros...

dificulties? Then usb_dev_info is not useful now? Should we clear it? This new structure is confused to me. There has already one structure struct usb_dev which included native usb device

When running longevity test and capturing acrntrace, generated acrntrace files sizes are too big. Sometimes we don't care very old trace. This patch adds ring buffer mode, fixes acrntrace file size

Can we remove intr variable? Is hasn't changed in this function and pass to pci_xhci_port_disconnect directly.. Ditto. What is mean of intr? From this patch, it almost useless.. Let's keep

Thanks! @David, can you take a look at this when you get a chance? Thanks, Geoffroy

Got it.

junjunshan1 <junjun.shan@...> writes: Some general conventions about commit logs: 1. Each line should be no more than 80 characters. Break the paragraph if it is longer than that.

MISARC has requirements about Marco redefinition, usage of ++ or -- and assignment operator in boolean expression. This patch is used to solve these violations. The modifications are summarized as

OK, this is my fault. I am not aware the code here has been changed to prepare_vm() recently. I will fix it in my next version. The purpose here is want to return a failure. Is it better to return a

In general we should do in different patch for bug fix. But this one is simple for those compile option --- this looks like MISRAC patches, we can do together to save

Absolutely, we should do it. This should be done in another patch, right? > > >