Re: umb(4) attachment

2016-06-28 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 28/06/16(Tue) 10:22, Mark Kettenis wrote: > [...] > It's already in. No real fallout as far as I know, except for that > report about some wierd umass interaction. But I don't think that's > actually related to my changes. It is not related, eric@ showed me the same problem during p2k16.

Re: umb(4) attachment

2016-06-28 Thread Mark Kettenis
> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:01:09 +0200 > From: Martin Pieuchot > > On 17/06/16(Fri) 22:22, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > As reported earlier, umb(4) currently doesn't attach to devices that > > implement both NCM 1.0 and MBIM, such as the Sierra Wireless EM7345 > > that is found in

Re: umb(4) attachment

2016-06-27 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 17/06/16(Fri) 22:22, Mark Kettenis wrote: > As reported earlier, umb(4) currently doesn't attach to devices that > implement both NCM 1.0 and MBIM, such as the Sierra Wireless EM7345 > that is found in some thinkpads. > > The diff below fixes this. It revamps the way we look up interface >

Re: umb(4) attachment

2016-06-18 Thread Marcus MERIGHI
Hello, the kernel does not compile for me with this patch. src/sys/dev/usb/usb.h is missing UISUBCLASS_NETWORK_CONTROL_MODEL. What value does it need? (I get no umb(4) device with a value of 15. Am I supposed to get one with this hardware and the correct value?) One OT GPS question below,

umb(4) attachment

2016-06-17 Thread Mark Kettenis
As reported earlier, umb(4) currently doesn't attach to devices that implement both NCM 1.0 and MBIM, such as the Sierra Wireless EM7345 that is found in some thinkpads. The diff below fixes this. It revamps the way we look up interface descriptors quite a bit. I removed the unused code for