On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:31:20AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:45:16AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > > > @@ -1074,6 +1089,7 @@ static int proc_clearhalt(struct dev_sta > > > > ret = checkintf(ps, ret); > > > > if (ret) > > > > return ret; > > > > + check_reset_of_active_ep(ps->dev, ep, "CLEAR_HALT"); > > > > if (ep & USB_DIR_IN) > > > > pipe = usb_rcvbulkpipe(ps->dev, ep & 0x7f); > > > > else > > > > > > In documentation is written: > > > > What documentation? Where? Maybe the documentation should be updated. > > Documentation/DocBook/usb.tmpl
Heh. That file hasn't been updated significantly since 2006! > > > Is possible that user space driver can issue dozen of URBs , then get > > > -EPIPE for last of them, and then call CLEAR_HALT ? > > > > Certainly that is possible. It wouldn't trigger the warning, because > > after the last URB terminates with -EPIPE there won't be any more URBs > > in the queue. > > > > > According > > > documentation, this behaviour should be correct. > > > > And indeed, it is correct. > > > > What would be incorrect is if userspace issues dozens of URBs, gets > > -EPIPE for the third URB, and then does CLEAR_HALT without first > > cancelling all the remaining URBs. > > Now I know what to tell user space maintainers. Thank you! You're welcome. Alan Stern -- 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
