From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264030AbUDQSxp (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Apr 2004 14:53:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264032AbUDQSxp (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Apr 2004 14:53:45 -0400 Received: from postfix3-1.free.fr ([213.228.0.44]:14470 "EHLO postfix3-1.free.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264030AbUDQSxn (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Apr 2004 14:53:43 -0400 From: Duncan Sands To: Alan Stern Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 7/9] USB usbfs: destroy submitted urbs only on the disconnected interface Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 20:53:38 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Cc: Greg KH , , , Frederic Detienne References: <200404172031.09200.baldrick@free.fr> In-Reply-To: <200404172031.09200.baldrick@free.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200404172053.38655.baldrick@free.fr> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 17 April 2004 20:31, Duncan Sands wrote: > Alan, do you have a suggestion for how best to go from > a struct usb_interface to an index? (though probably usbfs shouldn't use indices at all, just interface numbers and struct usb_interface).