Re: [Libusb-devel] usbfs: usb_submit_urb returned -121

[Peter S. <pe...@st...>]

Hi,

Daniel Drake wrote:
> > This patch instead changes the code path directly after
> > submission, and if errno == EREMOTEIO then the reap code is
> > instructed that all is well via reap_action = COMPLETED_EARLY.
..
> > While my guess is that the former patch would work for Ludovic this
> > one is much more correct. Please test it!
> 
> This patch would probably work OK but it isn't quite correct. If the 3rd 
> URB fails with EREMOTEIO, the code immediately below your patch will try 
> and cancel URBs 1 and 2. That's probably harmless, but it would be 
> logical and simple to avoid that.

Thanks for spotting that! I've updated the patch and described what
is going on in the comments too.

Would you prefer moving things around a little for aesthetical
purposes? Ie. moving the num_retired+= before the long comment,
and having an if() to catch the new special case?


//Peter