On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:10:22PM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
> Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> <snip>
> > > Makes no real difference - just so long as the acm driver doesn't claim
> > > CDCEther devices, and vice versa.
> >
> > I just received an e-mail that some modems do not work in 2.4.10 ...
> Bugger.
>
> > They have
> >
> > Device Class:SubClass:Protocol = 02:00:00
> >
> > ...
> >
> > And the ACM driver should probe on device and not on interfaces. Well,
> > maybe getting the probe called for an interface and then grabbing other
> > interfaces on the device would work too ...
> So much for dry-running the patch (
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-usb-devel&m=100003502506062&w=2 ) to try
> to avoid this.
>
> The ACM driver should not probe on device, it definately needs to probe on
> interface.
But when it needs two interfaces on the same device to function?
> It isn't acceptable to only be able to load acm or CDCEther, and
> not both.
Uh. Why probing on device should make it not work with CDCEther, when
subsequent per-interface checks in the driver eliminate the Ether class
devices?
> Do these devices not have suitable comm. class interface descriptors?
They do. In some of their configurations. Default is of course
vendor-specific interfaces.
> If not, how do they pass the sanity checks in acm_probe()? Any further
> description of the fault?
I'll forward the e-mail to you.
> I'll have a look, and try to come up with something workable.
--
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
