On Thu, 29 Aug 2013, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:23:31 -0400 (EDT)
> Alan Stern wrote:
>
> > You must never alter ehci->last_iso_frame like this. It violates the
> > driver's invariants for time to run "backward". After all, there may
> > already be other TDs scheduled for the f
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:23:31 -0400 (EDT)
Alan Stern wrote:
> You must never alter ehci->last_iso_frame like this. It violates the
> driver's invariants for time to run "backward". After all, there may
> already be other TDs scheduled for the frames you are about to scan
> again; they mustn't
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2013, Ming Lei wrote:
>
>> Below is the approach I proposed(mentioned in another thread), which should
>> be
>> simper than this one, any comments?
>>
>> drivers/usb/host/ehci-sched.c | 53
>>
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013, Ming Lei wrote:
> Below is the approach I proposed(mentioned in another thread), which should be
> simper than this one, any comments?
>
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-sched.c | 53
> ++---
> drivers/usb/host/ehci.h |1 +
> 2 files c
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 14:50:53 -0400 (EDT)
Alan Stern wrote:
> This patch does the real work. It fixes up ehci-hcd so that an URB
> submitted by a completion handler will keep the isochronous stream
> alive, even if the handler was delayed by running in a tasklet and the
> queue has emptied out
