Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] opticon: use generic code where possible

[Johan Hovold]

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Alon Ziv <alon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Here it seems you're turning write into a blocking function if you have
>> no bulk-out end-point. I'm not sure that is desired.
>
> Right...
> I considered doing it differently (which would require more code--I
> would need to track the outstanding control URBs, and would need a
> callback to free the kmalloc()ed setup packet). In the end, I left it as
> blocking because the actual protocol used by the OPN2001 is very light
> on writes (in fact, it never writes anything without waiting for a
> response, and its longest outgoing message is
> limited to 70 bytes).

But you already had a working non-blocking implementation in place
(authored by yourself, if I'm not mistaken) which did exactly that.
Why not simply keep it?

Thanks,
Johan
--
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/