> I had a chance to take look at your patch(es).  They didn't
> apply cleanly on my tree, and I noticed some issues ... so
> here's an updated version, without the driver-specific patches.
>
> I've tested this with a cdc-ether device and "usbtest", as
> well as drivers that shouldn't use any of the new codepaths.
> They behaved just fine.

Hi Dave, if, during probe() for an interface, a driver does
usb_driver_claim_interface on the interface being probed,
what will happen?  I think the answer is: bad things.
Look in drivers/usb/image/mdc800.c for an example of a
driver doing this.  Maybe the driver core should protect
itself against this...

All the best,

Duncan.


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel

Reply via email to