On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 08:01:47AM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> However, you not only removed the notification, but also the very check.
> This is not nice at all. You are depending on disconnect() cleaning up the
> whole mess needlessly.
Actually, that check is buggy. There is no serialisation with the
killing side. For instance, it has absolutely zero effect if
CPU0 CPU1
kaweth_close
kaweth_usb_receiv
urb->status == 0
status & KAWETH_STATUS_CLOSING
== 0
status |= KAWETH_STATUS_CLOSING
kaweth_resubmit_rx_urb usb_kill_urb(rx_urb)
Fortunately, usb_kill_urb causes kaweth_resubmit_rx_urb to fail with
EPERM.
As you can see, the urb->status check is not needed to ensure that the
URB will not be resubmitted. Since you can't rely on urb->status to
always be ECONNRESET/ESHUTDOWN in a shutdown case, it should be removed.
Thanks,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download
it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own
Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
