Am Freitag, 22. April 2011, 17:59:15 schrieb Paul Stewart: > > > >> free_netdev(net); > >> usb_put_dev (xdev); > >> } > >> @@ -1285,6 +1291,10 @@ int usbnet_suspend (struct usb_interface *intf, pm_message_t message) > >> * wake the device > >> */ > >> netif_device_attach (dev->net); > >> + > >> + /* Stop interrupt URBs */ > >> + if (dev->interrupt) > >> + usb_kill_urb(dev->interrupt); > >> } > >> return 0; > >> } > > > > There is a subtle question here: When is the best time to kill the > > interrupt URB? Without knowing any of the details, I'd guess that the > > interrupt URB reports asynchronous events and the driver could run into > > trouble if one of those events occurred while everything else was > > turned off. This suggests that the interrupt URB should be killed as > > soon as possible rather than as late as possible. But maybe it doesn't > > matter; it all depends on the design of the driver. > > I'm not sure I can answer this question either. As it stands, nobody > was killing them before. Just trying to make it better. Hm. Are we looking at the same code? usbnet_suspend now has: /* * accelerate emptying of the rx and queues, to avoid * having everything error out. */ netif_device_detach (dev->net); usbnet_terminate_urbs(dev); usb_kill_urb(dev->interrupt); This suggests that if you want to resubmit the interrupt URB in resume() you do it first. Which drivers use the interrupt URB? Regards Oliver -- 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
