> > > I really doubt that this issue can be not exposed. > > > > And why is that? I just gave you an argument from first > > principles. You can't refute that by pointing to a bug in > > one current driver. > > Because all the HCD has is a pointer that may or may not be valid.
Drivers that don't guarantee valid pointers have major defects. End of story. Debating it would be (more of a) a waste of my time. For example, it's not legit to use pointers after they've been kfreed, even if you're being well-intentioned and if it's done in another thread that you forgot to synchronize. That's just a bug, plain and simple, and it's not in the infrastructure code like kfree(). It's in your code that is passing around a pointer after its memory has been kfreed. > > I could see that a driver which frees an urb in its completion > > handler _and_ keeps pointers to those urbs accessible to > > other driver code has a big design bug -- it has no good way > > to know if such pointers are still valid. No SMP needed. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
