On 30.05.2012 19:28, Aleš Nesrsta wrote:

> It is probably not necessary - I think, really there will be "allocated"
> the same total number of QHs during communication by this new algorithm
> as with old algorithm.
> The reason is: Now will be used more "sync. QHs" but less "async.
> QHs" (because some "async. QHs" were "allocated" before to "emulate"
> interrupt transfer via bulk) - so the total sum should be the same now
> as before.

It's not about the used size but about code simplicity and avoiding
iterating through all QHs when not needed. Previously we had only one
type of QHs in one list, now we need 2 and clearly separating them would
make the code simpler.

-- 
Regards
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko