If nobody minds, I've taken the liberty of reducing the distribution list for this thread.
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003, Duncan Sands wrote: > > My feeling is that a reasonably large change may end up being the best > > thing to do. In particular, we probably only need to have one QH per > > queue, instead of one for each URB. But it'll be a while before that > > stuff gets done. > > But won't that result in starvation of some endpoints in favour of those > with vast numbers of urbs queued on them? At the moment the per-urb > QHs mean that the hc works on only one urb per endpoint before moving > on to the next endpoint. I don't think that will be a problem. So long as the TDs are marked "breadth-first", the HC will only work on one TD per queue (hence per endpoint) before moving on to the next. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
