Am Dienstag, 24. Januar 2012, 00:52:02 schrieb Bjørn Mork:
> /* --- method tables --- */
>
> @@ -111,13 +112,45 @@ struct wdm_device {
> struct work_struct rxwork;
> int werr;
> int rerr;
> +
> + struct list_head device_list;
> };
>
> static struct usb_driver wdm_driver;
>
> +/* return intfdata if we own the interface, else look up intf in the list */
> static struct wdm_device *wdm_get_device(struct usb_interface *intf)
> {
> - struct wdm_device *desc = usb_get_intfdata(intf);
> + struct wdm_device *desc = NULL;
> +
> + pr_debug("%s: intf->dev.driver=%p, &wdm_driver=%p\n", __func__, to_usb_driver(intf->dev.driver), &wdm_driver);
> +
> + mutex_lock(&wdm_mutex);
> + if (to_usb_driver(intf->dev.driver) == &wdm_driver)
> + desc = usb_get_intfdata(intf);
> + else
> + list_for_each_entry(desc, &wdm_device_list, device_list)
> + if (desc->intf == intf)
> + break;
> + mutex_unlock(&wdm_mutex);
> +
> + return desc;
> +}
Well, this is conceptually inelegant. If we need to maintain our own list,
we can put every instance on it. We should have as few code paths as
possible.
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
