On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Greg KH wrote: >On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 04:08:41PM -0500, Dan Streetman wrote: >> >> On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Greg KH wrote: >> >> >On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:53:29PM -0500, Dan Streetman wrote: >> >> >> >> This patch sets up the URB interval correctly when using interrupts via >> >> usbfs. This is finally possible since the automagic resubmission is gone. >> > >> >Hm, I don't understand, what does this patch do that couldn't be done >> >before? Oh, we were forced to do "one shot" interrupt urbs before, >> >right? How does this patch change the way userspace programs that >> >were used to the old way work? >> >> There is no change to userspace programs. Before the interval was set to >> 0 (one-shot), this changes usbfs to use the endpoint's requested interval >> (bInterval). > >But wouldn't any program that expected a one shot interrupt, be >supprised with this change? Or am I just missing something really basic >here?
well, 'one-shot' was just setting the interval to 0, which did 2 things: told the HCD to put the URB on the fastest possible polling interval, and don't automatically resubmit it. Since there's no automatic resubmission anymore, the 'one-shot' does nothing more than poll too fast. The other way of handling the interval is add a usbdevfs_urb->interval field, but that would require userspace driver changes, and isn't needed - a driver shouldn't be polling an endpoint at a different interval than the endpoint requests. -- Dan Streetman [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------- 186,272 miles per second: It isn't just a good idea, it's the law! ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: Influence the future of Java(TM) technology. Join the Java Community Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?sunm0004en _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
