On Tuesday 29 January 2002 18:16, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 05:51:24PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > I haven't really tested this out much yet, but want to give everyone > > > else a chance for comments on the implementation. > > > > Why do you use atomic_t for the count ? > > So I can use atomic_inc() and atomic_test_and_dec() calls on it :)
Very well, so where is it legal to use these functions from two threads of execution? There'd be a race between usb_put_urb() and usb_get_urb() as usb_put_urb() might free the urb. I see the overhead of atomic operations without gain obvious to me. > > Why does usb_get_urb() have a return value ? > > See http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-usb-devel&m=101114304229763 > for where that came from. Sorry, I should have added some documentation > to the function. That server refuses to talk to me. Regards Oliver _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
