On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 02:36:00PM +0100, Karsten Wiese wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 25. Februar 2009 schrieb Greg KH: > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 07:29:20PM +0100, Karsten Wiese wrote: > > > > > > ehci-hcd uses usb_get_urb() and usb_put_urb() in an unbalanced way causing > > > isochronous URB's kref.counts incrementing once per usb_submit_urb() call. > > > There is no need for ehci-hcd to deal with usb_get_urb() nor usb_put_urb() > > > anyhow, so patch removes their usages in ehci-hcd. > > > It also removes NULL assignments that have no effect. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Karsten Wiese <fzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > > > Made against 2.6.29-rc6. Suitable to go there and stable ASAP, no? > > > > Are you sure this is still needed? It doesn't apply to my tree as I > > think some other patch fixes this. > > Would that other patch be usb-ehci-slow-down-itd-reuse.patch? > Then no. > With it there is still the unbalancing urb = NULL; past > ehci_urb_done(ehci, urb, 0); in itd_complete(). > > I guessed, usb-ehci-slow-down-itd-reuse.patch would go in for 2.6.30, > so this doesn't fit ontop of usb-ehci-slow-down-itd-reuse.patch. Yes, that is true. > If there is no other patch, I see 3 sequence possibilities: > - usb-ehci-slow-down-itd-reuse.patch, then $SUBJECT > - $SUBJECT, then usb-ehci-slow-down-itd-reuse.patch > - both patches as one > Which do you prefer? For you to address David's concerns first :) thanks, greg k-h -- 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
