On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 11:52:09AM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> 
> I still don't see a real benefit in this mechanism, but if it's
> going to be done, then these were the two places to add
> it in the "hcd.c" file.

Just think, no more fun discussions with Oliver about the urb lifecycle,
multiple processors, and novice device driver authors :)

> Errm -- why not just do urb = usb_get_urb ()?  There's
> no need to rename the parameter.
> 
> Just increment the counter as part of linking it onto the
> device's urb list.  No failure test is even needed, and all
> the existing cleanup paths will handle decrementing that
> counter appropriately.  That'll be a much smaller/cleaner
> patch ... :)

Good point.  I changed this to be much less intrusive in the patch I
just sent off.

thanks,

greg k-h

_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel

Reply via email to