Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 27 Aug 2010 03:00:03 -0500
From:      Jim Bryant <kc5vdj.freebsd@gmail.com>
To:        Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net>
Cc:        freebsd-usb@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: imon vfd driver complexity question
Message-ID:  <4C777083.5080709@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201008270917.21098.hselasky@c2i.net>
References:  <4C776684.6000707@gmail.com> <201008270917.21098.hselasky@c2i.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
yes, i will use mutexes in the kernel code.  what i pasted was one 
function from a userland libusb-1 test program.

the imonSendCommand(); function encapsulates the control request.

Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Friday 27 August 2010 09:17:24 Jim Bryant wrote:
>   
>> is this level of bit-fiddling acceptable in the kernel?
>>     
>
> Yes, this is Ok.
>
> One more thing: Add a mutex pointer argument to functions that can sleep.
>
> Is the code you showed doing control requests?
>
> --HPS
>
>   



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C777083.5080709>