On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Christopher "Monty" Montgomery wrote: > > I don't like the idea of having two separate pathways for reporting the > > same kind of error. If one reporting technique is reliable and another > > isn't, why keep the unreliable one? > > When one can say 'the underrun is happening now' and the other simply > says 'an underrun happened some time ago, too late to do anything > timely.'
What difference does it make? What are you going to differently, knowing that an underrun is happening right now (and started in the very recent past) as opposed to knowing that an underrun started 2 ms ago (and may already have gotten caught back up)? And how much extra code -- and extra processing overhead -- do you want to add to your driver to handle the "underrun is happening right now" case? Surely in such a situation you want to _minimize_ work, not add extra processing to handle a new and unnecessary error-reporting path? Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
