Am Dienstag 23 Oktober 2007 schrieb Pete Zaitcev: > On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:38:37 +0200, Oliver Neukum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > + /* XXX Anchor these instead */ > > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->buflock, flags); > > > + if (!dev->read_urb_finished) { > > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->buflock, flags); > > > + usb_kill_urb(dev->interrupt_in_urb); > > > + } else > > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->buflock, flags); > > > Why bother? Simply call usb_kill_urb() unconditionally. > > Is it always safe to kill unfilled URBs? The filled but unsubmitted ones > are ok, but in this case it's possible that we only allocated something > but never submitted. Our current implementation happens to be safe by > virtue of ->dev being NULL in such case. I do not remember if we always > guaranteed that and since Vitaly is going to take this code for a > backport, I decided to play it safe.
I am not sure as far as 2.4 is concerned. In fact I am not sure 2.4 has usb_kill_urb() at all. Regards Oliver - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/