On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 11:12:39AM -0800, Angderson, Charyll wrote: > yes, i've had many comments about WORD (my 2 byte definition) and i will > change that to standard _u16. i mean to have asynchronous behavior... see > below. > > here is the big picture (run in a controlled environment w/ only USB card > "test" cards) > 1- disable run bit > 2- submit all sorts of transactions (bulk, isoc, and control) > 3- enable run bit > 4- verify transactions after some timeout
This is for some kind of hardware verification card, right? Nothing that any consumer could use? Could usb developers use this device? > for test purposes, i only submit one transaction at a time and wait for the > time out. with the current implementation (of 1 bulk transfer at a time), i > am checking the status after each call back. if there are no errors, i > assume that i got my bulk data. is this wrong? i get 2/3 "wrong data" and > 1/3 "correct data". data is 100% correct the FIRST time the transaction > goes out on the wire. > > what i think is happening, is that in application space, i'm passing in a > data buffer pointer of what i want the transaction to be. is there rules on > how these buffers are defined so that as the program moves from application > to driver space and from driver back to application space, i don't get my > buffer pointer swapped out on me? You must use the proper copy_to_user() and copy_from_user() functions for doing something like this. > BTW: my eventual goal is to verify all the submitted transactions after > some timeout. i plan to scan through the status bits of all submitted > transactions, but i currently know how to do that only for one transaction > at a time. help? Why don't you post your whole driver. That will enable people to help you out easier. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
