On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 10:36:04AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 1. April 2004 02:46 schrieb Matthew Dharm: > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 12:44:41AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, 31. M�rz 2004 22:42 schrieb Matthew Dharm: > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 11:17:04AM +0100, Richard Curnow wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 29 Mar, 2004 at 12:22pm, Matthew Dharm wrote: > > > > > > I've seen some buggy devices act this way. > > > > > > > > > > > > They can't handle the control requests interspersed between > > > > > > usb-storage transaction requests. It's a spec violation. > > > > > > > > > > So any platform/version combinations where it appears to work are > > > > > just likely to be luck, then? > > > > > > > > That would be my theory. > > > > > > What would you propose to do? Grab dev->serialize in both code > > > paths? > > > > To be honest, I don't have a proposal. > > > > We've talked about this before on the mailing lists... we've never come up > > with a good solution. > > It seems to me that the problem screams for a semaphore. The question is > just which semaphore.
That, and coming up with reasonable semantics to impose on every driver.
And this question: Do devices with multiple interfaces (and different
drivers attached to those different interfaces) need to interlock on that
semaphore?
Matt
--
Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver
SP: I sell software for Microsoft. Can you set me free?
DP: Natural Selection says I shouldn't.
-- MS Salesman and Dust Puppy
User Friendly, 4/2/1998
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
