On Thu, 3 May 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:

> Am Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2007 16:03 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > On Thu, 3 May 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > 
> > > > > How about exporting usb_disable_interface() and 
> > > > > usb_enable_interface()?
> > > > > It doesn't solve the problem for endpoint 0, but this case is rare.
> > > > 
> > > > We could; it would save drivers the trouble of keeping track of their 
> > > > own 
> > > > URBs.  Do you have a particular driver in mind for this?
> > > 
> > > Everything derived from newer versions of the skeleton driver.
> > 
> > Would we be better off modifying the skeleton driver to keep track of its 
> > own URBs?
> 
> I am unsure. The "fire-and-forget" technique is certainly simple for
> driver writers. Perhaps we should make it easier to keep track of URBs.
> A list_head in the URB?

People have discussed adding one in the past.  Greg might have some 
opinions.

We could export a utility routine very similar to usb_disable_interface(),
the only difference being that it doesn't change the toggle values.  But
what happens if the driver gets unbound while the device is still
suspended?  Who would then re-enable the interface?  We'd also have to add
something to usb_probe_interface() and usb_driver_claim_interface().

Alan Stern


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel

Reply via email to