Am Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2003 17:29 schrieb David Brownell:
> >>>>this ioctl calls usb_unbind_interface() directly. It seems to me that this
> >>>>will make the driver model's view inconsistent.
> >>>
> >>>How?
> >>
> >>I was under the impression that driverfs keeps records of associations
> >>of drivers and devices. Doesn't it?
> >
> >
> > Hm, good point, it does. Bleah, we need a way to disconnect stuff from
> > the driver core without actually deleting the device :(
>
> If usb_release_interface() doesn't use device_release_driver(),
> it's not the fault of this ioctl ...
Judging by the comments it cannot be called directly.
> Maybe it's finally time to get rid of the driver pointer inside
> "struct usb_interface", using the driver model to do that? (Just
Yes.
> like the driver data pointer.) Then usb_release_interface() would
> call device_release_driver() ... and usb_claim_interface() would
> call device_bind_driver().
How does claiming by usbfs fit into the picture?
[..]
> Make the unlink("/sys/bus/usb/drivers/WHATEVER/INTERFACE") syscalls
> work. That's annoyingly indirect, since the link is from driver to
> device (not device to driver), but it's the only way this binding
> shows up in sysfs.
Nevertheless, it seems logical.
Regards
Oliver
-------------------------------------------------------
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
