Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [OOPS, usbcore, releaseintf] 2.6.0-test10-mm1

[Duncan Sands]

> I agree that it would ease things to provide entry points for set_config
> and reset_device that require the caller to hold dev->serialize already.
> The issue you and Oliver noted about holding the bus semaphore will go
> away when I finally get around to rewriting usb_reset_device().

>From what Dave says, usb_reset_device shouldn't take dev->serialize (but
accidentally does via usb_set_configuration).  That seems strange to me:
I thought the point of usbfs taking dev->serialize is to protect against the
device settings changing, but now we have usb_reset_device that doesn't
take dev->serialize at all - and surely it changes the device settings!

With much confusion,

Duncan.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/