On Fri, Mar 15, 2002, Maksim Krasnyanskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > How about ENXIO error in submit_urb ? Should we fix uhci ?
> >
> >Yes, it needs to be fixed and it's relatively easy. I'll send a patch to
> >Greg when I get a chance to test it.
> Looks like we can simply get rid of uhc
> > How about ENXIO error in submit_urb ? Should we fix uhci ?
>
>Yes, it needs to be fixed and it's relatively easy. I'll send a patch to
>Greg when I get a chance to test it.
Looks like we can simply get rid of uhci_call_completion(urb) at the end of
uhci_submit_urb.
I'm not sure why would you
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 04:47:18PM -0800, Maksim Krasnyanskiy wrote:
>
> Heck. I guess I can't just say that BlueZ requires 2.5 kernel :)
I know, but it might encourage more people to try this new functionality
out and possibly backport it to 2.4 sometime in the near future.
> How about ENXIO e
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002, Maksim Krasnyanskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > USB folks, what is the general rule here ? Can completion handler free urb
> > > or not ?
> > > If urb is allocated dynamically it makes sense to allow completion handler
> > > to free it.
> >
> >As Oliver stated, this i
> > USB folks, what is the general rule here ? Can completion handler free urb
> > or not ?
> > If urb is allocated dynamically it makes sense to allow completion handler
> > to free it.
>
>As Oliver stated, this is messy :)
>But the good news is that for 2.5 all of this is fixed, and you can jus
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 03:25:38PM -0800, Maksim Krasnyanskiy wrote:
>
> USB folks, what is the general rule here ? Can completion handler free urb
> or not ?
> If urb is allocated dynamically it makes sense to allow completion handler
> to free it.
As Oliver stated, this is messy :)
But the g
