On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > A: No. > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? > Point taken :) > http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 06:12:01PM -0500, Pris Matic wrote: >> Hi Greg, >> >> Thanks for the reply. I verified that only the expected respective >> application processes are associated with the devices through lsof. >> Physically disconnecting the device resolves the problem... but I'm >> developing an application where this isn't a viable option. > > True, it shouldn't be necessary. > >> Could the application where the device is held busy after it closes be >> due to the ioctl(fd,TIOCEXCL) call? > > It shouldn't, as those should be cleared when the device is closed. > > But, if you don't do that ioctl call, does everything work just fine? > I just confirmed that removing the TIOCEXCL ioctl call fixes the issue. This doesn't really resolve the problem though, as devs should be able to grab exclusive control of the port without rendering it useless for future use in the same session. >> It's hard to get a description of >> the params in ioctl_list, but this seems to say that the given device >> should only be allowed access by the calling application. The device >> is not restored to global access (ioctl(fd,TIOCNXCL)). I forgot to >> mention, I can access the device through root no problem. Still, it's >> strange that this only occurs with my FTDI device. > > I agree, it is strange. > > 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
