Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 2 Oct 2020 13:53:58 +0200
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Status of orinoco_usb
Message-ID: <20201002115358.6aqemcn5vqc5yqtw@linutronix.de>
References: <20201002103517.fhsi5gaepzbzo2s4@linutronix.de>
 <20201002113725.GB3292884@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201002113725.GB3292884@kroah.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 2020-10-02 13:37:25 [+0200], Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Is it possible to end up here in softirq context or is this a relic?
> 
> I think it's a relic of where USB host controllers completed their urbs
> in hard-irq mode.  The BH/tasklet change is a pretty recent change.

But the BH thingy for HCDs went in v3.12 for EHCI. XHCI was v5.5. My
guess would be that people using orinoco USB are on EHCI :)

> > Should it be removed?
> 
> We can move it out to drivers/staging/ and then drop it to see if anyone
> complains that they have the device and is willing to test any changes.

Not sure moving is easy since it depends on other files in that folder.
USB is one interface next to PCI for instance. Unless you meant to move
the whole driver including all interfaces.
I was suggesting to remove the USB bits.

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Sebastian