On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 19:30:16 -0800, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 01 March 2006 5:53 pm, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 17:36:17 -0800, Marc Singer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Its response to #11 is what is > > > broken. It may be getting confused by the second status request *or* > > > it may have sent the STALL (is that the -32?) before it received the > > > second GET_STATUS.
> > If queueing in HCD works well, the device would be presented with the > > second control request before the first one completed, and so the second > > scenario should have played. This is my understanding of it, but I may > > be wrong. > > In this case you are. The HCD is *not allowed* to start one transfer before > the preceding one finishes. Somehow the "not" before the would has disappeared -- which is what the second scenario was. -- Pete ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
