On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Xiaofan Chen <xiaof...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Hans Petter Selasky <hsela...@c2i.net> wrote:
>> On Saturday 22 December 2012 11:17:15 Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Hans Petter Selasky <hsela...@c2i.net>
>> wrote:
>>> > If you look in the old libusb-0.1 code you'll see something different I
>>> > think. Could you check that?
>>> Not much differences in reality. I believe it is a document bug for the
>>> libusb-0.1.
>>> Both old libusb-0.1 code and libusb-1.0 use the same IOCTL under Linux
>>> and the behavior should be similar.
>>> Please refer to the following code listing and take note even though
>>> the name of the IOCTL is different but they are the same if you
>>> look at the defines.
>> Can you create a thread for this at the libusb lists?
> Okay.

There is no reply in that thread. But in another thread, Alan
Stern confirms that Linux libusb reset will not cause


The detailed Linux behavior is as following as explained by
Alan Stern.

It is not that pretty in this case since different OS may behave
differently. Summary here:

freebsd-usb@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-usb-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to