Re: [linux-usb-devel] queueing URBs?

[David Brownell]

> > Near as I can tell, that bit of text has never been correct ...
> > Clearly it's wrong today, and has been so for the last year!
> 
> Never been correct? Do you mean by design? Or by implementation?

Yes!  :)

Clearly by implementation, "facts on the ground".

To my way of thought, by design/architecture as well; and that text
was just a bug.  (One can argue "design bug" or otherwise.)   Maybe
some of the folk who advocated URBs in the first place will disagree.

I'll suggest that 2.5 might be a fine time to figure out what changes ought
to be made in the URB scheduling framework.  I want to see things be
simplified and streamlined ... and see better arguments for these "submit
more than one URB at a time" behaviors and their scheduling models.
Any arguments in favor of those models were ones I missed at the time.

- Dave



_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel