linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] usbatm: Detect usb device shutdown and ignore failed urbs.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:53:18 -0800
From:	Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@...hat.com>
To:	Duncan Sands <duncan.sands@...h.u-psud.fr>
Cc:	Simon Arlott <254ad70138dc1cdf241hjzcr0007jhhw@...nder.lp0.eu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	zaitcev@...hat.com, linux-usb-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] usbatm: Detect usb device shutdown and ignore
 failed urbs.

On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 11:43:38 +0100, Duncan Sands <duncan.sands@...h.u-psud.fr> wrote:

> > +		/* the module/device has probably been removed */
> > +		if (urb->status == -ESHUTDOWN)
> > +			return;
> > +
> >  		if (printk_ratelimit())
> >  			atm_warn(channel->usbatm, "%s: urb 0x%p failed (%d)!\n",
> >  				__func__, urb, urb->status);
> 
> I would rather just suppress the warning in this case, and still do the delayed
> schedule of the tasklet, in case this error was spurious and we're not really
> about to be disconnected.

I disagree. If ESHUTDOWN is received, the endpoint is definitely gone.
I can see why you might want to retry EPROTO, ELISEQ, etc. but this
case is different.

-- Pete
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/