On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Duncan Sands wrote: > On Monday 08 December 2003 17:03, David Brownell wrote: > > Duncan Sands wrote: > > > Hi Vince, I'm not sure, but it looks like a bug in the USB core. > > > I was kind of expecting this :) My patch causes devio.c to hold > > > a reference to the usb_device maybe long after the device has > > > been disconnected. This is supposed to be OK, but from your > > > > ... no, that's not supposed to be OK. Returning from disconnect() > > means that a device driver is no longer referencing the interface > > the driver bound to, or ep0. > > Well, I thought Greg wanted it to be OK :) Anyway, I don't use > the device after disconnect except to take the semaphore > (dev->serialize), check for disconnection (dev->state), and > of course to execute a usb_put_dev. Surely this usage should > be OK?
As long as your disconnect routine doesn't do usb_put_dev, so that it maintains its reference, I don't see a problem. But why do you want to check dev->state later on? Once your disconnect routine has returned, you should be totally through with the device. You should no longer care whether it's attached or not. And of course, remember that there are valid reasons for your disconnect routine to be called even when the device remains attached. (rmmod is a good example.) Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
