On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 18:31:17 +0000, harry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This 'USB split driver' has a 'front-end' in the Linux kernel > running in a guest domain of the hypervisor and a 'back-end' in the > Linux kernel running in a device driver domain (usually the special > privilidged domain 0).
Why don't you just let guest 0 to own the controller? This is what the guest 0 is for, as far as I know. If you create special stub drivers in the hypervisor, you might as well create virtual USB controllers for nonzero guests. > o - The back-end uses usb_register to register itself as a driver > matching all USB IDs so it gets probed for every USB device that is > connected. When a USB device is probed for a configured port, the > driver claims all the interfaces for the device. Ewww! Ewww! You are just going to hit all the difficulties the vmware guy hit, perhaps minus the size limitation in usbfs since you are bypassing it. I would expect that the scheme you're proposing were employed to let non-zero guests to drive some virtualized devices, but not for the guest zero. -- Pete ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
