On Tue, 3 Jun 2025, Tudor Ambarus wrote: > On 6/3/25 9:13 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > So please test if this patch solves your problem: > > It fails in a different way, the bridge window resource never gets > assigned with the proposed patch. Is that a failure? I was expecting that to occur. It didn't assign any resources into that bridge window. If there's nothing to be assigned into the bridge window, the bridge window itself is not created, that is the expected behavior (working as designed). So you're comparing to the bridge window that was made too large due to the disparity (and left unused, AFAICT). It would be possible to put the condition inside the block which adds the resource to the realloc_head, I initially put it there but then decided to remove the disparity completely because why keep it if no resource is going to be placed into the bridge window. What's that class 0 device anyway? Why it has class 0? > With the patch applied: https://termbin.com/h3w0 > With the blamed commit reverted: https://termbin.com/3rh6 -- i.
