> > Also, is there really any point in monitoring the line status? > > That's one thing that could be done perfectly well from user space. > > It's cheap and easy to do it in the kernel; it doesn't involve running a > daemon. Listening to the interrupt endpoint is probably better done in- > kernel, I think.
However line monitoring is entirely informative: it's not like the driver needs to do anything different if the line goes down. The only point of the monitoring is to tell the user that the line went down. So rather than the kernel doing the monitoring and using a printk (ugh) or a sysfs/proc/netlink whatever thingy to tell user space, doesn't it make more sense to have a little user-space utility that monitors the line and takes whatever action it thinks is appropriate? It is true that monitoring the line using usbfs has been an endless cause of kernel oopses - but I think I've managed to squash them all: there haven't been any reports for a while. Ciao, Duncan. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
