Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 12:23:30AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >
> > usb_trylock_device() returns non-zero on success.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Applied, thanks.
>
Can you unapply it and apply this one instead?
From: Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
As Andrew Morton has already spotted, I messed up the interpretation of the
result codes from various _trylock() routines. I didn't notice that
down_trylock() and down_read_trylock() use opposite conventions for
indicating success! This patch fixes the incorrect interpretation of
down_trylock(). That error may well be responsible for some of the
problems cropping up recently with OHCI controllers.
Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
25-akpm/drivers/usb/core/usb.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff -puN drivers/usb/core/usb.c~as339-interpret-down_trylock-result-code-correctly-in
drivers/usb/core/usb.c
--- 25/drivers/usb/core/usb.c~as339-interpret-down_trylock-result-code-correctly-in
Tue Jul 6 17:10:05 2004
+++ 25-akpm/drivers/usb/core/usb.c Tue Jul 6 17:10:05 2004
@@ -871,7 +871,7 @@ int usb_trylock_device(struct usb_device
{
if (!down_read_trylock(&usb_all_devices_rwsem))
return 0;
- if (!down_trylock(&udev->serialize)) {
+ if (down_trylock(&udev->serialize)) {
up_read(&usb_all_devices_rwsem);
return 0;
}
_
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
