On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 01:32:40PM -0800, Reilly Grant wrote: > On 2017-01-09 9:55 am, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 06:13:04PM +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote: > > > Greg KH <g...@kroah.com> writes: > > > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 09:40:59AM +0000, Kenneth Rohde Christiansen > > > > wrote: > > > >> Web USB can only grab devices which has special Web USB headers. It > > > >> can not > > > >> grab any USB device. > > > >> > > > >> https://wicg.github.io/webusb/#webusb-descriptors > > > > > > > > Ah, fun :( > > > > > > > > So, we can add a quirk into the kernel cdc-acm driver to never bind to a > > > > device that has the wusb platform capability descriptor, > > > > > > I fail to see why a quirk should be necessary. New device classes are > > > expected to use new class/subclass codes distintly different from > > > anything handled by existing class drivers. > > > > One would hope, but it seems like they want to piggy-back on the cdc-acm > > spec. But I could be totally wrong here, does anyone have the actual > > descriptor dump of a device anywhere? > > We don't want to piggy-back on the CDC-ACM spec. A WebUSB device should > always have its interfaces marked vendor-specific. Below is an example of a > device which implements both a CDC-ACM interface and a WebUSB interface.
Ick, why would you want both interfaces on a device? Are you going to allow firmware to talk to both endpoints at the same time? Why? Why not just make it a "one interface" type of device? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel