On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 05:02:29PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 02:21:55 +0300, Samuel Ortiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > +/* Callback transmission routine */
> > > +static void ks959_speed_irq(struct urb *urb)
> > > +{
> > > + /* unlink, shutdown, unplug, other nasties */
> > > + if (urb->status != 0) {
> > > + err("ks959_speed_irq: urb asynchronously failed - %d",
> > > urb->status);
> >
> > Here, shouldn't we call unlink_urb() if depending on the status value
> > (in the -EINPROGRESS at least) ?
>
> If a CPU is executing a callback, the URB is unlinked by definition.
Ok, that's what I wasn't sure about, if the callback was supposed to do
the unlink or not.
Cheers,
Samuel.
> So, I see no opportunity to invoke unlink_urb _here_ as you said.
>
> -- Pete
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
