> > Can we in this way totally avoid allocating memory in the HCDs ?
>
> There's a principle called "modularity" that argues against pushing
> knowledge to places it doesn't belong ... like details of QH/ED and
> TD memory allocations being handled outside the HCDs that need
> those data structures! :)
Agreed. But we can ask the HCD how much to reserve allocating the urb.
> The only allocations I suggested getting rid of is for "urb->hcpriv", by
> a strategy like skb->cb in the networking subsystem. Safe enough,
> I could imagine that even going into 2.4 kernels.
>
> Establishing QH/ED state at a better time/place would be more work,
> but I think it'd be worthwhile in the 2.5 kernels ... it'd certainly make
> it easier to do some things in the HCDs, and to abstract some of
> the scheduling so there are fewer HCD-specific behaviors. And by
> moving those allocations out of the per-request path, that's one
> more category of potential swap problem that's eliminated.
Yes. This concerns me at present.
Regards
Oliver
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
