On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, Toralf Lund wrote: > >and according to > >Documentation/usb/error-codes.txt, -EILSEQ is a CRC mismatch. > > > ... but this does, of course. The problem was that it never occured to > me to look in the Documentation directory. > > > In other > >words, the received packet was invalid -- either it was transmitted wrong > >or it got garbled. > > > > > Could it be that it was never transferred at all? That looks more likely > based on the state of the device; it seems like it's waiting to send > data at the point where the problems occur, which might mean that it > somehow missed the the data request from the host, or that it was never > sent.
No. If it was never transmitted at all you would get -ETIMEDOUT or -EPROTO (if the device didn't even send a NAK). > >Timeout again is pretty clear. Also -110 is -ETIMEDOUT. The device > >failed to complete the bulk-in request within the time limit specified by > >your program. > > > > > Yes. Something I wondered about was if the timeout in question was > indeed the one my program specifies - and not one internal to the driver. There are no timeouts internal to the driver. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools! Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5047&alloc_id=10808&op=click _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
