From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:06:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:06:10 -0400 Received: from nat-pool-meridian.redhat.com ([199.183.24.200]:57231 "EHLO devserv.devel.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:06:00 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:06:14 -0400 From: Pete Zaitcev To: t.sailer@alumni.ethz.ch Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Patch for bizzare oops in USB Message-ID: <20010820170614.A28653@devserv.devel.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20010818013101.A7058@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <3B80FBA9.556B7B2B@scs.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3B80FBA9.556B7B2B@scs.ch>; from sailer@scs.ch on Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 01:59:37PM +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:59:37 +0200 > From: Thomas Sailer > This is bad for other users of usb_control_msg/usb_bulk_msg that depend on > the sleep to be interruptible. Would you mind to explain how a user of usb_control_msg may depend on the sleep being interruptible? Forgets to set a timeout? Actually, I rethought the problem and I have a better fix, but for an different reason entirely. A user of usb_control_msg who knows too much about usb_control_msg still sounds fishy to me. -- Pete