From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G2xh6-00021H-MO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:05:32 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G2xh5-0001zL-Gx
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:05:32 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2xh5-0001yy-9h
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:05:31 -0400
Received: from [84.96.92.11] (helo=smtp.Neuf.fr)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1G2xk3-0007fJ-TF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:08:36 -0400
Received: from [84.102.211.90] by sp604005mt.gpm.neuf.ld
	(Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-5.05 (built Feb 16 2006))
	with ESMTP id <0J2M0056OCHH0RG0@sp604005mt.gpm.neuf.ld> for
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:46:29 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:46:28 +0200
From: Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [usb] call destroy for usb devices upon removal from
	guest
In-reply-to: <1153125312.4812.7.camel@vaio>
Message-id: <44BD56B4.6010004@bellard.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <1153125312.4812.7.camel@vaio>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Lonnie Mendez wrote:
> lo list.  I have found the old diff to be incorrect on many levels.  New
> diff has additionally cleanup code for the linux redirector.  Please see
> the attached patch for solution.

Forget my last comment - I understand the problem now. I think it was a 
bad idea to use 'usb_reset' to destroy the usb device. Ideally a 
specific method should be added because it has no relation with the USB 
protocol (it is used to clear resources and it is perfectly possible 
that a given device can be inserted, removed and inserted again without 
having been destroyed). Another point is that the unused message 
'USB_DESTROY' should be... destroyed.

Regards,

Fabrice.