>> Matt, is this patch ok to apply? > Yes and no. > Parts of it look okay, and parts don't.
Can you be more precise? Or is the plural just your single following remark? > why have retries dropped from 10 to 3 in one place? Yes, you spotted the only change in behaviour, apart from possible changes in debugging printout. With earlier 2.5 kernels I would get a kernel crash with 10 retries, while the kernel survived with 3. As I said in a previous letter, usb-storage is not in a perfect shape yet. But apart from this practical fact, there is also a theoretical reason. Very often the first attempt fails, for various reasons. Perhaps there is still a Unit Attention to react to. Usually the second attempt succeeds. Just to be sure, try three times. Of course, in a perfect world, it would not matter how often one tried. As it is, with our rather fragile USB system, I find that things crash when unexpected interrupts arrive. Sometimes a warm reboot does not clear this situation, and the kernel crashes immediately at the next reboot. A cold reboot, an actual power cycle, is required to make things work again. The more often one retries, the more certain it is that the kernel is not at the same place in a conversation as the device. Andries _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
