On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Axel Waggershauser wrote: > I don't know why I didn't have this idea earlier but I still have my old > driver written for 2.4.18 and voila: the "buggy" machine works well with > 2.4.18. I think that clearly shows that the hardware is not per see > buggy. I guess it could still mean the controller doesn't behave > according the spec but if I can get it to work, violating the spec, that > would be the way to go, right? > > The problem is now that the two different kernels/drivers are _so_ > different that I don't know where to start...
They are. In fact, I've never studied the 2.4 version. It's a lot more complicated than the one in 2.6. I recommend concentrating on 2.6, although the fact that it seems to work with 2.4 is a useful data point. You are seeing some rather unexpected behavior, and it would be best to understand what's going on before rushing to try and fix things. Let me attempt to duplicate your experiments on my system. I've got a device that can be set up to delay responding to a bulk message (was your URB bulk or control? -- I forget) and I will unplug the cable during that delay and see what happens. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
