On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 08:31:54AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 05:11:25PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: > > I vote for a clean solution, a fixup of existing implementations and > > a clear note about how to allocate buffers for USB drivers. I believe > > faulty allocations of this kind can explain quite a lot of problems on > > x86_64 machines. > > Yeah, I really don't want to have to change every driver in different > ways just depending on if someone thinks it is going to need to run on > this wierd hardware. > > Alan, any objection to just using usb_buffer_alloc() for every driver? > Or is that too much overhead? FWIW, most drivers I've seen in the past hours use a wild mix of kmalloc(), kzalloc(), kcalloc() and usb_buffer_alloc(). That should really be unified. Daniel _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
