Re: [PATCH] tm6000: Add parameter to keep urb bufs allocated.

2012-10-08 Thread Ezequiel Garcia
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Julian Scheel wrote: > Hi Ezequiel, > > Am Donnerstag, den 04.10.2012, 14:35 -0300 schrieb Ezequiel Garcia: >> Nice work! Just one pico-tiny nitpick: > > Should I update the patch to reflect this? Or is it ok if the maintainer > integrated your proposal when comitti

Re: [PATCH] tm6000: Add parameter to keep urb bufs allocated.

2012-10-08 Thread Julian Scheel
Hi Ezequiel, Am Donnerstag, den 04.10.2012, 14:35 -0300 schrieb Ezequiel Garcia: > Nice work! Just one pico-tiny nitpick: Should I update the patch to reflect this? Or is it ok if the maintainer integrated your proposal when comitting it? > On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Julian Scheel wrote:

Re: [PATCH] tm6000: Add parameter to keep urb bufs allocated.

2012-10-04 Thread Ezequiel Garcia
Hi Julian, Nice work! Just one pico-tiny nitpick: On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Julian Scheel wrote: > On systems where it cannot be assured that enough continous memory is > available > all the time it can be very useful to only allocate the memory once when it is > needed the first time. A

[PATCH] tm6000: Add parameter to keep urb bufs allocated.

2012-10-04 Thread Julian Scheel
On systems where it cannot be assured that enough continous memory is available all the time it can be very useful to only allocate the memory once when it is needed the first time. Afterwards the initially allocated memory will be reused, so it is ensured that the memory will stay available until