What was the decision on this? I don't recall
seeing agreement on a solution and implementation.
Thanks,
Miles
David Brownell wrote:
> Two chunks of kernel code disagree on how hubs should be reported.
>
> The call_policy() code says they're just like other class devices, while
> the modutils metadata in hub.c says they're really per-interface devices.
> Those each tell different parts of the story to the policy agent code, and
> confuse policy agents that can't use the extra data usbdevfs exposes
> (maybe it's not configured).
>
> I'd change the hub code to match based on device class (unless the usb
> 2.0 spec doesn't guarantee hubs use device class 9?) and will add a
> "usb.handmap" entry to work around this for kernels that don't do that.
>
> - Dave
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
