Sam Bishop wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 August 2006 3:40 am, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
>> This patch also fixes a bug in usb_device_poll() at the same time.
>> Previous code always raised POLLIN bit although no event happened
>> on the bus.
>
> I believe this is expected behavior. I mentioned it in the p
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 3:40 am, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> This patch also fixes a bug in usb_device_poll() at the same time.
> Previous code always raised POLLIN bit although no event happened
> on the bus.
I believe this is expected behavior. I mentioned it in the patch I submitted
and no on
David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 August 2006 9:35 am, Sam Bishop wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:30:45AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
>>> On Monday 28 August 2006 1:27 pm, Sam Bishop wrote:
+ /* To see what's changed, compare the file's previous and current
+ contents or sc
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 10:51 am, David Brownell wrote:
> Erm, what I meant was removing mention of the error prone "compare" case.
> If you're going to mention it, highlight that it's got internal races;
> otherwise, don't mention it.
I believe my patch is now what I originally intended: a litt
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 9:35 am, Sam Bishop wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:30:45AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > On Monday 28 August 2006 1:27 pm, Sam Bishop wrote:
> > > + /* To see what's changed, compare the file's previous and current
> > > +contents or scan the filesystem. (Scan
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:30:45AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 28 August 2006 1:27 pm, Sam Bishop wrote:
> > + /* To see what's changed, compare the file's previous and current
> > + contents or scan the filesystem. (Scanning is more precise.) */
>
> Rather than "more precise"
On Monday 28 August 2006 1:27 pm, Sam Bishop wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 03:04:33PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > Just revert to the previous language ... if you want, emphasize that
> > the scanning is to figure out precisely what changed.
>
> How's this? (I've made a few other small cha
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 03:04:33PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Just revert to the previous language ... if you want, emphasize that
> the scanning is to figure out precisely what changed.
How's this? (I've made a few other small changes too.)
A little more detail on how and when to poll() /
On Thursday 24 August 2006 1:09 pm, Sam Bishop wrote:
> I also removed the reference to "scanning the filesystem" as a way to
> detect hotplug events. I can't think of any reason why someone would
> want to do it that way.
The reference was about seeing what changed, so that e.g. you can
display
On Thursday 24 August 2006 2:47 pm, Sam Bishop wrote:
> On Thursday 24 August 2006 2:49 pm, David Brownell wrote:
> > On Thursday 24 August 2006 1:09 pm, Sam Bishop wrote:
> > > I also removed the reference to "scanning the filesystem" as a way to
> > > detect hotplug events. I can't think of any
On Thursday 24 August 2006 2:49 pm, David Brownell wrote:
> On Thursday 24 August 2006 1:09 pm, Sam Bishop wrote:
> > I also removed the reference to "scanning the filesystem" as a way to
> > detect hotplug events. I can't think of any reason why someone would
> > want to do it that way.
>
> The r
11 matches
Mail list logo