On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Phil Dibowitz wrote: > Matthew Dharm wrote: > > I was concerned, also... that is, until I noticed that the entry was using > > US_SC_DEVICE, which means it _wasn't_ doing a subclass override. > > > > In other words, the comment was wrong. > > Um - the first entry does that, but that's not where the comment is removed: > > -/* This entry is needed because the device reports Sub=ff */ > UNUSUAL_DEV( 0x054c, 0x0010, 0x0106, 0x0450, > "Sony", > "DSC-S30/S70/S75/505V/F505/F707/F717/P8", > US_SC_SCSI, US_PR_DEVICE, NULL, > - US_FL_SINGLE_LUN ), > + US_FL_SINGLE_LUN | US_FL_NOT_LOCKABLE ), > > > That uses US_SC_SCSI.
Yes. I removed the comment not because it was wrong, but because it was redundant. You can tell just by reading the entry that the subclass override must be necessary -- if it weren't needed it would say US_SC_DEVICE instead. (How can you tell? Because the Protocol entry has been updated in exactly that way. Since the Subclass entry wasn't updated it must be necessary.) That was the reason I invented US_SC_DEVICE and US_PR_DEVICE in the first place. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
