On Wednesday 30 March 2005 4:30 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote:
ChangeSet 1.2181.4.72, 2005/03/24 15:31:29-08:00, david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx
[PATCH] USB: usbnet uses netif_msg_*() ethtool filtering
This converts most of the usbnet code to actually use the ethtool
message flags. The ASIX code is left untouched, since there are
a bunch of patches pending there ... that's where the remaining
handful of "sparse -Wbitwise" warnings come from.
Signed-off-by: David Brownell <dbrownell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx>
It would be nice if people at least CC'd me on net driver patches.
Sorry. When drivers fit multiple classifications (e.g. USB _and_ NET,
or USB _and_ PCI _and_ PM, etc) it's unfortunately routine that not all
interested parties see them until something hits LKML. Even when the
changes have significant cross-subsystem impact (these don't).
netfi_msg_ifdown() is only for __interface__ up/down events; as such, there should be only one message of this type in dev->open(), and one message of this type in dev->stop().
I was going by the only writeup I've ever seen, which doesn't mention
such a rule at all. The messages you highlighted are compatible with
these rules: the interface is actually going down at that point.
http://www.tux.org/hypermail/linux-vortex/2001-Nov/0021.html
If there are other rules, they belong in Documentation/netif-msg.txt
don't they? That way folk won't be forced to guess. Or risk
accidentally following the "wrong" set of rules...
@@ -3044,7 +3047,7 @@
memset(urb->transfer_buffer, 0, urb->transfer_buffer_length);
status = usb_submit_urb (urb, GFP_ATOMIC);
- if (status != 0)
+ if (status != 0 && netif_msg_timer (dev))
deverr(dev, "intr resubmit --> %d", status);
}
this looks more like a debugging message?
It's an error of the "what do I do now??" variety, triggered by
what's effectively a timer callback. USB interrupt transfers
are polled by the host controller according to a schedule that's
maintained by the HCD.