On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Peter Stuge wrote: > Dave Mielke wrote: > > [quoted lines by Peter Stuge on 2015/02/11 at 15:57 +0100] > > > > >I would expect ioctl(fd, IOCTL_USBFS_REAPURBNDELAY, &urb) to either > > >return -1 with errno = ENODEV, or to return 0 with urb->status = ESHUTDOWN. > > > > I just reverified. It's definitely returning -1 with EAGAIN. > > That seems like a kernel bug to me. No. It's normal behavior when an URB is not complete. > > >What happens if you ioctl(fd, IOCTL_USBFS_DISCARDURB, ) instead of REAP? > > > > If I give it the address of the urb I'm expecting, it returns 0, > > That's good. So the code path for discarding the URB has no bug. > > > and then the non-blocking reap changes to returning -1 with ENOENT. > > ..which also makes sense, because the urb was just discarded. > > > But I don't believe you should have to discard the URB when the > device disappears. How do you know the device has disappeared? Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
