Re: USB autosuspend vs. URB submission

[Oliver Neukum]

On Thursday 10 January 2013 10:20:42 Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Oliver Neukum wrote:

> > In the long run it is probably a good idea to pass duplicated URBs to usbmon by
> > a special code path.
> 
> I'd prefer to add extra information to the WARN_ONCE message.  Even 
> though it would require the extra effort of correlating the dmesg 
> output with the usbmon output.

A stack_trace() I presume.
But what is the use of needing two logs?

> You know, it's possible that the URB really was not submitted before 
> but instead the urb->hcpriv field got overwritten.  Of course, that 
> would also be a bug.

We could log a corrupted URB generically speaking.

	Regards
		Oliver

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/