On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 04:06:32PM -0400, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2002, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 03:24:33PM -0400, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > > > > > > This totally defeats the purpose of what reference counting is used for, > > > which is so we don't have to synchronize across different parts of the > > > code. Reference counting makes it easier and now it looks like in 2.5 > > > that we want to make things more complicated. We've reduced reference > > > counting solely to find bugs. > > > > Yes, you are correct, this code only "verifies" the current way the dev > > structure is used. It isn't "true" reference counting logic at all > > (like what is present in the urb logic now.) > > > > It "should" only shake out code that doesn't play by today's rules, > > right? Or am I missing something? > > Yes. It shook out the fact that uhci.c wasn't updated to play by the new > rules. > > However, it can only be useful if code uses reference counting after > uhci_disconnect is called, which is a perfectly legitimate use of > reference counting in the kernel. That is what it is traditionally > used for, so the memory doesn't disappear under us.
EXACTLY!!! Bleah, maybe I will take some time tomorrow to fix all of this correctly... greg _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
