On Fri, Feb 07, 2003, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > > David, it appears that timeouts aren't even enabled in the OHCI driver > > because DO_TIMEOUTS is not defined anywhere. Did I miss where it was > > defined or was this done on purpose? > > It's not defined ... the DO_TIMEOUTS code probably doesn't work > either (submitted by accident). > > Seems like right now only the UHCI code supports timeouts. I've > not been able to persuade myself that it really matters ... all > drivers seem to behave OK using higher level timeouts (as in SCSI, > or usb_control_msg). On the other hand, I've not persuaded myself > to simplify the 2.5 UHCI code by removing that, either ... ;)
There is one driver using the feature now (stv680.c) and I was trying to get it into the usbnet.c driver when I noticed the fact it was disabled. Most drivers do their own timeout handling it appears. It doesn't matter too much if we support URB timeouts or we don't in 2.4, but I don't like the fact that 2 HCDs support it, but 1 doesn't. We should make a decision to fix the support in OHCI (I've already started) or yank it out of the UHCI drivers. I the only argument either way that I can think of is in regards to the API. It's there already in 2.4 and I'd rather not change the API for 2.4 further, but then again it's a broken feature right now (on OHCI atleast) and only one driver in the kernel uses it, so maybe it's something no one will miss? Anyone have an opinion either way? JE ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
