Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2.6.19-rc4] usb urb unlink/free clenup

2006-11-07 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006 10:30:56 +0100 Mariusz Kozlowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do I send the next diff against the work I already did? Yes please. - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2.6.19-rc4] usb urb unlink/free clenup

2006-11-07 Thread Mariusz Kozlowski
Hello, > > We do not need to check for urb != NULL before we call them. > > Seems reasonable. > > Your patch had all its tabs replaced with spaces by your email client. I > fixed that all up, but it was rather dull work and I'd prefer not to have > to do it again. Will investigate - hopefully

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2.6.19-rc4] usb urb unlink/free clenup

2006-11-06 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006 22:28:37 +0100 Mariusz Kozlowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > > In many places usb_(unlink,kill,free)_urb() are called this way: > > if (urb) > usb_something_urb(...); > > which is not needed because functions like usb_unlink_urb() and > usb_free_urb(

[linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2.6.19-rc4] usb urb unlink/free clenup

2006-11-06 Thread Mariusz Kozlowski
Hello, In many places usb_(unlink,kill,free)_urb() are called this way: if (urb) usb_something_urb(...); which is not needed because functions like usb_unlink_urb() and usb_free_urb() are defined this way: void usb_free_urb(struct urb *urb) { if (urb) k