> > 5. You do not lock against concurrent tasklets. IMHO with sufficiently
> > bad luck two tasklets can try to submit the rx urb at the same time.
>
> Nope. It is one tasklet and one tasklet is never run on two CPUs at
> once even on SMP machine. Quote from Rusty's Unreliable Guide to Kernel
>
On Sat, 13 Apr 2002 06:47, Gaétan RYCKEBOER wrote:
> For now, it is working with HID, mouse + stylus, but not in absolute
> mode. Thi is an obvious limit.
>
> I would like to make it working, by pathing hid driver, or an AIPTEK
> driver which was realeased with kernel more recent than 2.4.18.
>
>
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 05:06:44PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Greg, thanks for doing this. It'll be a good excuse to try bitkeeper.
> Please don't rush it into Linus' tree, I'll need a small incentive ... :)
Ok, I'll wait a bit, it would make my life a bit easier if you start
using bitkeeper
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 07:00:52PM -0700, Stuart Lynne wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 03:37:14PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > bk clone bk://linuxusb.bkbits.net/usbd-2.5 usbd-2.5
> > will create a subdirectory with the whole tree.
>
> Hmm... that pulled everything over but it is all in SCCS di
suscribe
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Friday 12 April 2002 20:01, Petko Manolov wrote:
>
> pool, the tasklet will not be scheduled a second time, as
> only the completion handler will reliably schedule the tasklet.
Fixed.
> 5. You do not lock against concurrent tasklets. IMHO with sufficiently
> bad luck t
Greg, thanks for doing this. It'll be a good excuse to try bitkeeper.
Please don't rush it into Linus' tree, I'll need a small incentive ... :)
> > Currently I'm doing everything in 2.4.XX, will this work in a 2.4.XX
> > tree if I move it there (i.e. does the current 2.5 USB user or rely
> > on
On Friday 12 April 2002 20:01, Petko Manolov wrote:
> > IMHO draining the pool about 50% and then refill it in
> > one go would be much more efficient.
>
> The pool doesn't change the efficiency. At all. I tested the driver
> with and without rx skb cache and there was no difference. Looks like
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:27:42PM -0700, Stuart Lynne wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 02:18:15PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've gotten the Lineo USB Device code merged into the main kernel tree.
> > It can be seen at:
> > bk://linuxusb.bkbits.net/usbd-2.5
>
> Have bk, havn'
Hi all,
I've gotten the Lineo USB Device code merged into the main kernel tree.
It can be seen at:
bk://linuxusb.bkbits.net/usbd-2.5
I've added the source files under the drivers/usb/device directory, made
the code match Documentation/CodingStyle (mostly, there's still some
work to be do
> 3. The handling for errors in urb->status in the rx path looks fishy.
> There's a code path in which you don't schedule the tasklet.
It turned out returning on -ENOENT is the right thing. This error code
mean the urb is in unlink stage and no action is required. :-)
Petko
_
Hi to all,
I'm currently working on a driver for a LIFETEC (medion) tablet, LT9750.
It seems to ba an AIPTEK 8000U ou 12000U (22.8x30.4cm)
For now, it is working with HID, mouse + stylus, but not in absolute
mode. Thi is an obvious limit.
I would like to make it working, by pathing hid driver,
> IMHO draining the pool about 50% and then refill it in
> one go would be much more efficient.
The pool doesn't change the efficiency. At all. I tested the driver
with and without rx skb cache and there was no difference. Looks like
the bottleneck is in the usb bus itself, not in the memory a
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:52:15PM +0200, Thomas Sailer wrote:
> Even though I originally implemented it, the sanity check removed
> by the patch below seems wrong to me...
Applied to 2.5, thanks.
greg k-h
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 10:42:31AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Hi, can you integrate this into Linus' tree?
>
> This patch just does minor internal cleanup, renaming to
> match the put/get convention used elsewhere in Linux.
> (Get ref, put it back ... not "putting a new ref here".)
Applied,
On Friday 12 April 2002 17:17, you wrote:
> Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > On Friday 12 April 2002 02:44, you wrote:
> >>OK, this is the final patch which should cover the case we are
> >>low on memory and if usb_submit_urb() fail. Comments?
> >
> > I'd like to see the patch. Would you please include i
- Original Message -
From: "David Brownell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 8:50 AM
Subject: fxload 2002_04_11 release
> I'm pleased to announce that the "fxload" package, split out from
> the core hotplug utilities (latest release 2002_04_01),
Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Friday 12 April 2002 02:44, you wrote:
>
>>OK, this is the final patch which should cover the case we are
>>low on memory and if usb_submit_urb() fail. Comments?
>
>
> I'd like to see the patch. Would you please include it ? ;-)
Here we go again. :-)
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 06:10:03PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:27:56AM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 09:52:37AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > >
> > > Furthermore subsubsystem deserve their own directories.
> > > serial and storage deserve their
19 matches
Mail list logo
