On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 07:15:47PM -0400, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > > Are you trying to separate the hardware specific portions of the device > > from the "logical" portions? (I think this is your main point, right?) > > > > If so, this patch _might_ work, but I'd like to get Johannes to look at > > it in light of uhci.c. > > uhci.c is safe since it doesn't implement a deallocate() call. usb-uhci > is safe as well because of the unlink_urbs (or whatever it's called) call. > > I think the patch that David proposed to move deallocate() into > usb_disconnect() should go into 2.5 and 2.4 since it's needed to make the > code safe. That will be immediately make the code safe at the cost of some > complexity in some HCD's.
So do you recommend that I add this patch, the way it is? If so, David, can you give me a 2.4 version of the patch too? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________________________ 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
