On Mon, May 08, 2000, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Re Johannes' patch to:
>
> > First off, I've attached a patch to completely nuke usbdevfs's VFS layer in
> > favor of using devfs for all of that stuff. Nodes are still created, and you
> > use the same ioctl()'s, you just use a different name and you don't have
> > to worry about mounting an extra filesystem to get it.
>
> I applied this, and have to point out that it's got two
> incompatibilities with the current usbdevfs code (that I
> noticed):
>
> - Current names vs new ones, for the first root hub:
>
> /proc/bus/ usb/001/001 ... usbdevfs rules
> /devfs/ usb/bus1/device1 ... rule in this patch
This is to keep it consistent with the rest of the devfs naming scheme.
> - Read of "device1" no longer returns the device descriptor.
If this is true, there's a bug. It's supposed to return the device
descriptor, and then all of the config descriptors afterwards.
It's an extension of the API.
> So on grounds that it's API-incompatible, I'd say it needs
> more work yet. Neither of these changes was mentioned as
> being intended ("same API") ... what's the deal?
It is the same API. The first problem isn't part of the API and the second
is a bug. I'll look into that.
> I'd sure rather see "ohci@address" and "uhci@port" addresses
> for the busses, since that style name is not a function of the
> order I modprobed drivers or plugged in hardware. Changing
> the device names doesn't seem like it was necessary.
You are correct, it is not necessary, but it keeps everything
consistent.
JE
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
