On Friday 06 October 2006 7:00 pm, Christopher "Monty" Montgomery wrote: > On 10/6/06, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Nope; not a tradeoff. For one thing, the pointers _are_ typed; > > for another, we have no option to trade _to_ since the hardware > > requires using those typed pointers. > > You cannot tell the type of the object you currently have. You can > only tell its type if you walked to it from the object that pointed to > it; *that* is the typed pointer.
So? > > On top of that, the traversals are easily encapsulated ... so that > > it's a case of "get it right once, then don't touch the code". Just > > like <linux/list.h>, pagetables, and similar complex data structure. > > I'm not arguing it's broken; I'm arguing that it's needlessly tricky. People do sometimes have that reaction to hardware-level typed pointers. But it's not like there's a real option ... > Also, it means you can only traverse the list in one direction. > Building the QH side of the schedule is an operation that needs to > traverse *back* not *forward*, and as such, we end up having to parse > the schedule into temporary lists that are repeatedly thrown away > anyway. I take it you're referring to FSTN support, with transaction translators? Without FSTNs, I don't see any need for that sort of thing. And even with FSTNs, the traversal needed would be "lateral". - Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
