On Mon, May 13, 2002, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If the plan is to make all of the HCD's use hcd.c, then why do we have > > hcd_submit_urb and usb_submit_urb? > > > > We should be able to move a variety of checks into usb_submit_urb. > > That'd be one way to handle this particular set of issues, yes. > And in fact the one I'd been assuming I'd do before long. > It's not quite ready to go yet though (see separate post). > > Particularly now that, in 2.5, the signature of the "usb_bus" > submit path has been fixed to address the mem_flags > problems ... before 2.5 the host drivers had to guess the > right SLAB_* flags to use, but couldn't do that right.
Greg brought up a good point that there are other HCD's out there and forcing them to use hcd.c won't happen. It sounds like we should probably move some of the checks from hcd_submit_urb into usb_submit_urb so they cover all of the HCD's? JE _______________________________________________________________ Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
