On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 06:05:09AM +1030, David Newall wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > >> developing is entirely wrong. Oh well. Mind you, providing a > >> write_room function is NOT a real solution; it merely reduces the > >> condition to a usually-winnable race. (Ironically, when I back-ported > >> the 2.6 driver, I excluded its new write_room function. Mistake.) > >> > > > > What race do you see left ? > > > > On second thoughts I'm not sure that I do. I've had my head so full of > 2.4 pl2303, and 2.4 pl2303 with this, that and the other added to it, > that I was probably just confused. Certainly it's not important, > because I didn't mean the 2.6 driver, but an hypothetical 2.4 with a > simplistic write_room function added (e.g. return > port->write_urb->status == -EINPROGRESS ? 0 : 64). OPOST processing's > use of putchar to expand CRLF sends two writes (or putchars), with no > intervening checks. Since I'm just polishing off my back-port of > 2.6.24.1 pl2303 to kernel 2.4, the matter is quite irrelevant. > > By the way, what happened to HUawei E620 UMTS/HSDPA card? It's in > pl2303 in 2.6.23; not in 2.6.24.1. (Do I remove it from my back-port?)
Yes, please remove it, it was incorrectly listed in the pl2303 driver in the .23 kernel. thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
