Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:48:07 -0700 (PDT) | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | | Subject | Re: Linux 2.6.25-rc4 |
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Your patch is more robust and we should go with it
> (and thanks for fixing this bug!).
Ok, I committed the patch as-is, since it's what Anders tested, but I'm
not at all convinced that it is necessarily the best or final form. The
things I am aware of but didn't think about all *that* deeply:
- do we get return values etc right (ie if we complete the command that
didn't give any data, how do we account the size of it?)
- what about that remaining old unexpected case? I kept the "wait for it
with timeout" behaviour for the case that wasn't an issue here, but if
it really is a shared interrupt, that seems like it's going to always
reset the timeout to WAIT_WORSTCASE, which doesn't sound really right.
so I think this particular bug is fixed and we should be better off, but
I'm definitely not claiming that the code shouldn't have people thinking
about improving it..
Linus
|  |