Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266072AbUALHjR (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 02:39:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266075AbUALHjR (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 02:39:17 -0500 Received: from multivac.one-eyed-alien.net ([64.169.228.101]:35769 "EHLO multivac.one-eyed-alien.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266072AbUALHjP (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 02:39:15 -0500 Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:39:05 -0800 From: Matthew Dharm To: David Brownell Cc: Alan Cox , Marcelo Tosatti , Linux Kernel Mailing List , USB Developers , Greg KH Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: USB hangs Message-ID: <20040112073905.GA8580@one-eyed-alien.net> Mail-Followup-To: David Brownell , Alan Cox , Marcelo Tosatti , Linux Kernel Mailing List , USB Developers , Greg KH References: <1073779636.17720.3.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20040111002304.GE16484@one-eyed-alien.net> <1073788437.17793.0.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk> <4001DB52.7030908@pacbell.net> <20040111233104.GF23039@one-eyed-alien.net> <40021E8E.3010709@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="SUOF0GtieIMvvwua" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40021E8E.3010709@pacbell.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Organization: One Eyed Alien Networks X-Copyright: (C) 2004 Matthew Dharm, all rights reserved. X-Message-Flag: Get a real e-mail client. http://www.mutt.org/ Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1606 Lines: 56 --SUOF0GtieIMvvwua Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 08:11:58PM -0800, David Brownell wrote: >=20 > >>> Plus I'd > >>>argue PF_MEMALLOC is a better solution anyway. > >> > >>It certainly seems like a more comprehensive fix for that > >>particular class of problems! :) > > > > > >Is it really more comprehensive? As I see it, it will only affect code > >executed in the context of the usb-storage thread. But, what about code > >which is invoked in tasklets or other contexts? >=20 > Isn't it true that only that thread is allowed to > submit usb-storage i/o requests? That's very true. What I'm concerned about is the downstream effects of a usb_submit_urb() or the corresponding scatter-gather equivalents. Matt --=20 Matthew Dharm Home: mdharm-usb@one-eyed-alien.= net=20 Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver You should try to see the techs say "three piece suit". -- The Chief User Friendly, 11/23/1997 --SUOF0GtieIMvvwua Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAAk8ZIjReC7bSPZARAuCqAKDDTBRL/5R6dzZj4r2SvB6SfI2S9wCgicKE v8rAAPFP6ZIb58Em9nhUCis= =jF5K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SUOF0GtieIMvvwua-- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/