Am Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 17:45 schrieb John Tyner:
> > Sorry, my humor got the better of me. You should add a few comment
> > regarding the locking through v4l open. YOur relienance on it makes
> > it very subtle and impossible to understand without comments.
> > The code itself is very well.
>
> Absolutely. Once there are no more problems with the code, I'll document
> it before trying to send it on to Greg.
Please do so.
> Maybe it would just be better to hold the busy mutex through the open call
> to make it explicit.
IMHO just add a comment. Unnecessary locks are bad.
> > > Well, I found one between disconnect and release. I'm hoping this fixes
> > > that race as well as the abusive use of semaphores you mentioned.
> >
> > What did you change?
>
> Release used to look like:
> if disconnected
> wait for disconnect complete
> free memory
> else
> mark camera as not in use
>
>
> if the camera was disconnected after the check but before the camera was
> marked as not in use, then no one would free the memory. disconnect would
> still see a user, and release still thinks the camera is plugged in. since
> release now takes the busy mutex, it keeps disconnect from racing straight
> through in that case.
OK, well done.
Regards
Oliver
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
