On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, usb usb wrote:

> Let me clarify one more thing - it's an interrupt URB.
> Just before I submit the URB, I do some more checking.
> I set some values, and also check them.
> status = 0, interval = 256 (I send in 9=>2^8),

Um, what do you mean by "send in"?  Is 9 the value you pass to 
usb_fill_int_urb?  If so then it's correct.  Or is 9 the value you 
assign to urb->interval?  If so then it's wrong: urb->interval should 
be set to 256.

>  buffer
> len = 4 (my requirement), and the callback function.

If this doesn't already answer your question, perhaps you should post the 
relevant portion of your source code.  Include also the 
/proc/bus/usb/devices entry for your device, so we can check that the 
values you use are acceptable to the device.

> Everything seems to be alright. I will try to check
> for halt (_get_status, _clear_halt) , and follow USB
> specs (5.7.5), and see what happens. Is it a good
> idea/practise to do those sycnhronous calls directly
> from my code?

It's not a good idea to check things like that unless you have some good 
reason for it.  In this case an endpoint halt would give you -EPIPE, not 
-EINVAL.

> Is there a significant change in 2.6.16?

I don't think so.

Alan Stern



_______________________________________________
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-users

Reply via email to