On 5 Jun 2003 at 10:05, Alan Stern wrote:On Wed, 4 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My concern is with the division of responsibility between the core and the device driver. My proposal is an architecture which supports device drivers which are responsible for all aspects of the configuration and operation of the devices which they support.
Other than "configuration", which hasn't yet been supported in Linux (one of my pet 2.5 issues), it seems to me your proposal boils down to supporting the existing Linux-USB API ... since it does support such drivers already.
There can be no question that Linux should support such drivers. The
current API allows them, in the sense that it will load them based on
matching the VID/PID and allow them to bind to all the interfaces. But it doesn't provide any support for making such a process
particularly easy.
Nor is it particularly hard. Use USB_DEVICE (or its versioned siblings) in device ID tables, make probe() bind all the relevant interfaces -- typically just a single interface.
This is at the heart of my concerns. I suggest we should facilitate this model to the greatest extent possible. I believe It is highly advantageous to allow the vendor to control all aspects of the interface to the product.
And other than configuration, how does that differ from the status quo?
- Dave
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features you've never dreamed of, try TotalView 6 free at www.etnus.com. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
