On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 15:34:33 +0100, Oliver Neukum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a certain danger of getting a reset followed by a secondary reset > as an error treatment, followed by ... Could you do a real disconnect in > theses cases? The semantics of a disconnect are different, because the physical devices are not carried over a disconnect. So, suppose you have a serial adapter as an interface, like on IBM RSA-II, and you have a shell on it. If the usb-storage resets the other interface, then a disconnect on the serial side will cause the shell to get SIGHUP, which is a pain if you were in vi at that time... But a reset is a reset, the shell would not even notice anything unless the screen was being repainted right that moment. The two-signal reset bothers me too, because it has to interact well with actual disconnect, and generally I do not like this sort of thing. And I hoped that at least the first of these callbacks could be indicated simply by a return code of an URB. But I suppose Alan knows what he's doing. -- 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://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
