[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 14:31:45 +0100
From: walter harms <wharms@....de>
To: Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>
CC: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, usb-storage@...ts.one-eyed-alien.net,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: storage: fix infinite wait loop by incrementing
loop counter
Am 02.02.2017 14:19, schrieb Colin King:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>
> If jumpshot_get_status continues to return a failed result then the
> wait loop will spin forever because the waitcount counter is never
> being incremented and we don't ever timeout. Fix this by incrementing
> waitcount.
>
> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> ---
> drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c b/drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c
> index 011e527..81d82ce 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/storage/jumpshot.c
> @@ -311,6 +311,7 @@ static int jumpshot_write_data(struct us_data *us,
> if (result != USB_STOR_TRANSPORT_GOOD) {
> // I have not experimented to find the smallest value.
> //
> + waitcount++;
> msleep(50);
> }
> } while ((result != USB_STOR_TRANSPORT_GOOD) && (waitcount < 10));
the function looks a bit complicated ..
what i about this ?
for(waitcount=0;waitcount<10;waitcount++)
{
result = jumpshot_get_status(us);
if ( result == USB_STOR_TRANSPORT_GOOD)
break;
msleep(50);
}
just my 2 cents,
re,
wg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists