On Mon, May 13, 2002, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 04:26:36PM -0400, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > > > > It's easy with the patch I sent to revert it to the 2.4 method of > > reference counting: > > > > --- linux-2.5.15/drivers/usb/core/devio.c.old Mon May 13 16:17:55 2002 > > +++ linux-2.5.15/drivers/usb/core/devio.c Mon May 13 16:22:25 2002 > > @@ -502,6 +502,7 @@ > > ret = -ENOMEM; > > if (!(ps = kmalloc(sizeof(struct dev_state), GFP_KERNEL))) > > goto out; > > + usb_inc_dev_use(dev); > > ret = 0; > > ps->dev = dev; > > ps->file = file; > > @@ -538,6 +539,7 @@ > > unlock_kernel(); > > destroy_all_async(ps); > > kfree(ps); > > + usb_dec_dev_use(dev); > > return 0; > > } > > That should be usb_get_dev(dev) and usb_put_dev(dev) now :)
Yes. I couldn't remember the exact name of the renamed calls when I wrote this patch so I just used something I knew people would understand the meaning of :) Thanks for the correction. > And yes, this proves my point too, the patch will stay. I haven't compiled the above patch, let along tested it yet. I also think there may be some other situations where we may need something similar. I'd like to do a code review as well as test the patch. Can I send you a new patch, relative to the patch you sent out with the usb_{get,put}_dev changes, in the next day or two? JE _______________________________________________________________ Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel