The usb/error-codes.txt document says -ECONNRESET is
for async unlink, which is what I saw happening. What HCD
is passing -ENOENT (synchronous unlink) there?
Actually, that distinction is something I'd like to rip out in 2.5
on the grounds that the completion function really has no
reason to care how some other execution context happened
to initiate that unlink ... unlike that thread! :)
Seems like updating usb-storage not to care which of those
two codes it got should be pretty simple as a patch for 2.4;
any reason why such a patch shouldn't go in?
- Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Dharm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "David Brownell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Christian Mahr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: continued story on Archos Jukebox... USB2.0
It's expecting -ENOENT
This is a long-standing problem with various HCDs not all doing the same
thing.
Matt
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 03:59:38PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > The basic problem here is that the abort isn't recognized as an abort
> > because of the URB status code.
>
> The last I remember was a question about -ECONNRESET, and
> so far as I can tell the EHCI driver obeys usb/error-codes.txt in
> that area ... what status was usb-storage expecting instead?
>
> - Dave
>
>
>
>
--
Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver
C: They kicked your ass, didn't they?
S: They were cheating!
-- The Chief and Stef
User Friendly, 11/19/1997
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
