On Fri, Jan 30, 2004, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Still tracking down the repeatable OOPS in uhci when an receive interrupt > > transfer is aborted. > > > > I noticed that either the comment or the code is wrong about locking > > urb->lock. uhci_add_td_to_urb is *not* called with urb locked, but > > the comment says it must be. Is the code or the comment wrong? > > I think the comment is wrong. The idea is to prevent conflicts with > uhci_remove_td_from_urb, but it shouldn't be possible for both of them to > be running simultaneously anyhow. add_td_to_urb only runs during > submission and remove_td_from_urb only runs following a failed submission > or when an urb is unlinked or completed.
It's not just for remove_td_from_urb, but any code which walks the list as well. It may not be necessary for add_td_to_urb since nothing else should be able to run on that URB at that point, but I'll have to double check all of tha paths to make sure. JE ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
