My only concern is that the behavior be _very_ well defined for this. I can think of all sorts of corner-cases (URBs about to complete, endpoints halted, zero-length packets, etc) which all need to be covered before we make a change like this.
Matt On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 12:41:54PM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > In the interest of de-complicating the API and code, > I wonder how folk would react to removing the flag > that enables bulk queuing ... doing it as needed but > without needing an explicit request. > > How it works today: when the UHCI drivers find a > bulk URB being submitted to an endpoint that already > has an URB queued, they check that flag and report > an error if it's not set. > > Since any device driver knows (had better!) that it's > doing that, the flag doesn't really add value. All > it does is create error paths within device drivers > and HCDs. (The UHCIs do some magic to deal with the > case, but won't kick it in unless that flag is set > AND it's needed.) > > I'd like to hear justifications for keeping that flag > around, which would make it worthwhile to keep it. > Otherwise I suspect I'll prepare a patch at some point > that'll just make the 2.5.* UHCIs not care about it. > > - Dave > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference > August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm > > _______________________________________________ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel -- Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver P: Nine more messages in admin.policy. M: I know, I'm typing as fast as I can! -- Pitr and Mike User Friendly, 11/27/97
msg07079/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
