Am Sonntag, 16. Mai 2004 17:48 schrieb Alan Stern:
> Greg & everyone:
>
> While implementing the suggestion to replace synchronous usb_unlink_urb()
> with usb_kill_urb(), a question arose concerning the value stored in
> urb->status. Right now the status is -ECONNRESET for asynch and -ENOENT
> for synch unlinks. Should I preserve this behavior? Or is now a good
> time to do away with -ENOENT, on the grounds that a driver shouldn't care
Then also hunt down ESHUTDOWN.
[]
> Oliver's suggestion to wake up the queues only when URB_REJECT is set is a
> very good one. It will reduce the number of unneeded wakeups to the point
> where I think we can have a single wait_queue_head for all synchronous
> unlinks rather than an individual queue header stored in each URB. That
> will please the people who disapprove of adding extra fields to struct
> urb. Does anyone object to this?
Good idea.
Regards
Oliver
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: SourceForge.net Broadband
Sign-up now for SourceForge Broadband and get the fastest
6.0/768 connection for only $19.95/mo for the first 3 months!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=2562&alloc_id=6184&op=click
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
