On Fri, 2008-09-05 at 14:19 -0500, Jason Wessel wrote: > > What version of kvm, or what was the commit HEAD hash? > > > > Since you posed this to the qemu-devel mailing list, I tried it on the > QEMU development head.
I've posted to qemu-devel and kvm-devel, working primary with the kvm release packaging it for Ubuntu Gutsy/Hardy/Intrepid. > > > What does the patch report as the method of access to the USB > > file-system? > husb: using /dev/bus/usb > > > Does the same device work without the patch? > > Of course not, because the host does not have /proc/bus/usb. If you're using Ubuntu you can easily test with /proc/bus/usb by editing the comments out to enable the 'magic lines' in /etc/init.d/mountdevsubfs.sh or issue them manually: # # Magic to make /proc/bus/usb work # #mkdir -p /dev/bus/usb/.usbfs #domount usbfs "" /dev/bus/usb/.usbfs -obusmode=0700,devmode=0600,listmode=0644 #ln -s .usbfs/devices /dev/bus/usb/devices #mount --rbind /dev/bus/usb /proc/bus/usb > What might be a defect is that it did not work with the > |host:vendor_id:product_id and immediately failed. Yes, I've been looking at that. Although the code-path goes through the patch - usb_host_scan() - it simply passed the structures and function pointer on without touching them. I'm currently analysing it with some dprintf() entries to see why usb_host_find_device() doesn't get the device. > I am guessing it is unique to this class of device or perhaps even this > particular device. I agree, maybe it is the serial character-based devices. As I can reproduce it with a different VID:PID of the same class it seems more likely. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
