speedtch testatm.c,1.4,1.5

Roman Kagan rkagan at mail.ru
Fri Apr 8 08:06:12 EDT 2005

On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 01:42:17PM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote:
> > BTW do we really need to manually release interfaces we've claimed?
> > Won't they get disconnect()-ed by the usb core?
> Yes, because there's also "logical disconnect", in which just one
> interface can get disconnected (you can play with this easily
> enough using usbfs; maybe you can also do it by writing to a sysfs
> file but I don't remember).  In order to keep things simple I would
> like to unbind from all interfaces.

Then it looks like you need to usb_set_intfdata(intf, NULL) _before_
releasing that intf, to avoid repeating the same thing in its
disconnect().  Anyway recursing into the disconnect for the same
interface still sounds like a bad thing, and IMHO should be avoided by
not releasing it its own disconnect().  Or was I wrong im my analysis?


More information about the Usbatm mailing list