Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 16 May 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Call Trace:
> > > > [] usb_disable_device+0x96/0xd0
> > >
> > > Looks like usb_disable_device() is calling put_device() with a NULL
> > > argument. W
On Sun, 16 May 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Call Trace:
> > > [] usb_disable_device+0x96/0xd0
> >
> > Looks like usb_disable_device() is calling put_device() with a NULL
> > argument. When this happened, had you applied this patch?
> >
> > h
Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Call Trace:
> > [] usb_disable_device+0x96/0xd0
>
> Looks like usb_disable_device() is calling put_device() with a NULL
> argument. When this happened, had you applied this patch?
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-usb-devel&m=108447200205
On Sat, 15 May 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Plugging in a digital camera. This was the second time I'd plugged it in
> since system boot. A celan unmount was performed after the first usage.
>
>
>
> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 004c
> printing ei
