[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <596DDB63.6010206@rock-chips.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 17:56:51 +0800
From: jeffy <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com>
To: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
CC: briannorris@...omium.org, dianders@...omium.org,
Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
"Gustavo F. Padovan" <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] Bluetooth: btusb: Fix memory leak in play_deferred
Hi Oliver,
On 07/18/2017 05:41 PM, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 18.07.2017, 17:36 +0800 schrieb jeffy:
>> Hi Oliver,
>>
>> On 07/18/2017 04:41 PM, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>>>
>>> Am Dienstag, den 18.07.2017, 16:08 +0800 schrieb jeffy:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am afraid not. We cannot silently drop one part of a transmission.
>>>>> I am afraid that the correct algorithm, if we encounter an error at
>>>>> that stage, is to abort the operation and report an error.
>>>>>
>>>> so i should break the loop when error happens right?
>>>
>>> Yes
>> ok, i'll do that.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> and i uploaded 2 version of patches, which one do you prefer to go on?
>>>
>>> Where to?
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9847037
>> and
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9846617
>
> I think that as soon as one URB fails, you should not even try
> to submit any other deferred URBs. You are taking one out from
> the middle of a sequence. That cannot be right.
ok, that make sense.
new patch sent :)
>
> Regards
> Oliver
>
>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists