Stavros Markou wrote:
I haev some questions concerning usb_physical_reset_device :
* Why isn't this function exported like usb_reset_device is ?
The fourth patch of that short series of mine exports it,
but renames it "__usb_reset_device" to match most other
locked/unlocked call pairs in Linux.
Hi,
I 've decided to change my approach to the reset of the device but I
haev some questions concerning usb_physical_reset_device :
* Why isn't this function exported like usb_reset_device is ?
* Why does the use of the semaphore locks kernel inside this
function before the usb_set_ad
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Stavros Markou wrote:
> Alan Stern wrote:
>
> >I took a quick look at your file. Making reset_device() call
> >destroy_configuration() and get_configuration() like you do is very
> >unsafe. No wonder you're getting kernel panics!
> >
> >
> >
> destroy_configuration and
Alan Stern wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Stavros Markou wrote:
First of all, I want to thank you and Alan for your help. Second for the
drivers I am developing and In order to be independent from a kernel 's
usb_reset_device (since it doesn't work for the moment and the users of
the driver do
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Stavros Markou wrote:
> First of all, I want to thank you and Alan for your help. Second for the
> drivers I am developing and In order to be independent from a kernel 's
> usb_reset_device (since it doesn't work for the moment and the users of
> the driver don't want to me
