At 06:52 PM 2/19/02 -0500, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 00:36:14 +0100 (CET) > > From: Martin Diehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Johannes, Pete - if it's ok for you I'd like to suggest this could go into > > early 2.4.19-pre series. > >I do not mind. If I remember JE's argument right, he did not >like how long it takes to renumber a bus with a dozen of >devices (about 6..8 seconds: noticeable timeout). > >I understand that it's a kludge, but would it be possible >to tighten up the timer to 100ms for high-speed devices >and leave it at 400ms for slow-speed devices? > >-- Pete
If I remember correctly, Win98 did a quick 100 ms attempt and if it failed then retried reset using a longer delay. Win98 did lots of retries, maybe infinite, probably to get around problem devices. I dont have a catc right now, so maybe someone else could verify this. The advantage of this technique is that the normal, healthy devices get enumerated quickly. Regards, Steve __________________________________________ Steve Calfee -- embedded systems consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
