From e598e28401bb25d4d639b29f297a549badbf0cfa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Hans de Goede Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 12:17:48 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ehci: Correct a comment in fetchqtd packet processing Since my previous comment said "Should never happen", I tried changing the next line to an assert(0), which did not go well, which as the new comments explains is logical if you think about it for a moment. Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann (cherry picked from commit cf1f81691d1998fa8fe5bfcb8b498fb3723cf3c3) Signed-off-by: Michael Roth --- hw/usb/hcd-ehci.c | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/hw/usb/hcd-ehci.c b/hw/usb/hcd-ehci.c index 2534394..2f3e9c0 100644 --- a/hw/usb/hcd-ehci.c +++ b/hw/usb/hcd-ehci.c @@ -2045,7 +2045,10 @@ static int ehci_state_fetchqtd(EHCIQueue *q) ehci_set_state(q->ehci, q->async, EST_HORIZONTALQH); break; case EHCI_ASYNC_FINISHED: - /* Should never happen, as this case is caught by fetchqh */ + /* + * We get here when advqueue moves to a packet which is already + * finished, which can happen with packets queued up by fill_queue + */ ehci_set_state(q->ehci, q->async, EST_EXECUTING); break; }