On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:13:53 -0800
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:59:26PM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
| @@ -60,6 +61,7 @@ struct usb_serial_port {
| struct usb_serial * serial;
| struct tty_struct * tty;
| spinlock_t
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 09:36:55AM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:13:53 -0800
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:59:26PM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
| @@ -60,6 +61,7 @@ struct usb_serial_port {
|struct usb_serial *
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:56:33 -0200
Eduardo Pereira Habkost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 09:36:55AM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
| On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:13:53 -0800
| Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| | On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:59:26PM -0200, Luiz
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 09:36:55AM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:13:53 -0800
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:59:26PM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
| @@ -60,6 +61,7 @@ struct usb_serial_port {
|struct usb_serial *
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 10:07:08AM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
Since the spinlock seems to be only used to protect 'write_urb_busy', I agree
with those changes.
Greg, do you? If so, I suggested we should add the semaphore first, because
it is a bug fix.
Yes, I agree.
I can
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:59:26PM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
@@ -60,6 +61,7 @@ struct usb_serial_port {
struct usb_serial * serial;
struct tty_struct * tty;
spinlock_t lock;
+ struct semaphoresem;
You forgot to document what
