On Wednesday 03 July 2002 16:01, Duncan Sands wrote: > On Tuesday 02 Jul 2002 8:34 am, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 07:17:19PM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > > > PS: The taintedness and the "System.map says 2.5.24, pwcx-i386 says > > > 2.4.18" is coming from the pwcx-i386 binary module that enables high > > > resolution transfers from the camera. If anyone cares I will try > > > reproducing the oops without it. > > > > Does the same oops happen in 2.5.24, without the pwcx-i386 module? > > I haven't been able to reproduce it without the pwcx-i386 module. > So let's blame it on that binary module and forget it!
I'm sorry, this is pissing me off. This is no way of handling a bug report.... Did you try to reproduce it *exactly* like withthe pwcx module? Because you wrote: * Just got the following oops by plugging in my Philips Toucam Pro * webcam, and unplugging it a few seconds later (before everything * finished getting set up. ...which leads me to believe there's a race condition somewhere. If there really is a problem with the pwcx module, that's important because a lot of people use that module. But I'm a bit skeptical since the pwcx module is really simple, and does nothing with the kernel except for a printk(). So it would be hard to trample over your system... Your Oops stacktrace points to somewhere in usbcore, and because you are unplugging the camera, it may be a simple dangling pointer in there... - Nemosoft ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek No, I will not fix your computer. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
