On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 08:05 +0000, Peter Chen wrote:
>  > 
> > On Wed, 2014-03-12 at 15:18 +0000, Poulain, Loic wrote:

> > > Implementing the btusb reset_resume seems risky, a patch implementing
> > > this callback has been previously reverted due to HID dual mode device
> > > regression. (cf https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/11/26/347)
> > 
> > Alan, perhaps the core code should honor QUIRK_RESET and unbind if it is
> > set. Then hid2hci could set the flag.
> > 
> 
> It will cause reset every time, just like Poulain said, some devices may
> only fail at rare cases.

True, but that is the point. We cannot tell devices apart.
If we know reset_resume() will fail, there's no point in the attempt.
If we take the premise that a class driver ought to have reset_resume()
then we need a way to identify the hopeless cases.

In addition there is the problem that a driver isn't told why
reset_resume() is called.

        Regards
                Oliver


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to