[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904171952260.4042@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: leiming <tom.leiming@...il.com>
cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@...il.com>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM List <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Linux SCSI List <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
video4linux-list@...hat.com, laurent.pinchart@...net.be,
mchehab@...radead.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.30-rc2-git2: Reported regressions from 2.6.29
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, leiming wrote:
>
> >From 5715e310a939f3f7cd3e88eae8f25fedbb28def4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:32:51 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] V4L/DVB:usbvideo:fix uvc resume failed
>
> Now urb buffers is not freed before suspend, so uvc_alloc_urb_buffers
> should return packet counts allocated originally during uvc resume
> , instead of zero.
>
> This patch is against v2.6.30-rc2.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/media/video/uvc/uvc_video.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/video/uvc/uvc_video.c b/drivers/media/video/uvc/uvc_video.c
> index a95e173..c050b22 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/video/uvc/uvc_video.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/video/uvc/uvc_video.c
> @@ -742,7 +742,7 @@ static int uvc_alloc_urb_buffers(struct uvc_video_device *video,
>
> /* Buffers are already allocated, bail out. */
> if (video->urb_size)
> - return 0;
> + return DIV_ROUND_UP(video->urb_size, psize);
I don't think this is right. It should round _down_.
It's supposed to return 'npackets', but if you pass it a different packet
size than it was passed originally, it can now return a potentially bigger
number than the already allocated buffer, no?
So I think it should round down (ie use a regular divide). No?
Linuse
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists