From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261974AbTLLVB6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:01:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262009AbTLLVB6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:01:58 -0500 Received: from mail1.kontent.de ([81.88.34.36]:10662 "EHLO Mail1.KONTENT.De") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261974AbTLLVB5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:01:57 -0500 From: Oliver Neukum To: Alan Stern , David Brownell Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [OOPS, usbcore, releaseintf] 2.6.0-test10-mm1 Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:01:43 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.1 Cc: Duncan Sands , Kernel development list , USB development list References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200312122201.48194.oliver@neukum.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Freitag, 12. Dezember 2003 21:48 schrieb Alan Stern: > On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, David Brownell wrote: > > > Alan Stern wrote: > > > > >>That would also reduce the length of time the address0_sem > > >>is held, > > > > > > > > > It would? How so? > > > > It would be dropped after the address is assigned (the bus > > no longer has an "address zero") ... rather than waiting > > until after the device was configured and all its interfaces > > were probed. I think that's the issue Oliver alluded to in > > his followup to your comment. > > I thought it did that already. Oh well... Not so simple. Khubd goes down a list. If the first item on its list is not your failed reset, a deadlock will occur. After you have submitted the URB that really does the reset, you are commited. You must either set a valid address or disable the port. You can rely on nobody else to do that. Regards Oliver