On 14-Aug-13 1:52, Pete Batard wrote:
> On 2013.08.14 00:21, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> The 2nd option is not possible without changes in libusbx. Right now
>> it is not possible to access the other interfaces other than the first
>> interface in an interface collection of a USB IAD device as of
>> now
On 2013.08.14 00:21, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> The 2nd option is not possible without changes in libusbx. Right now
> it is not possible to access the other interfaces other than the first
> interface in an interface collection of a USB IAD device as of
> now, even though the supported driver (eg: WinU
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 3:48 AM, Jan Becvar wrote:
>
> The composite parent workaround is good enough for me in the moment, it
> just might become limiting in the future, that's why I raised the
> question...
The question is perfectly legitimate. The solution on the other
hand, will take time. An
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 2:26 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On 2013.08.13 16:15, Jan Becvar wrote:
>> Forgot to add that my idea/hope was that libusbx, when setting backend
>> of a composite interface, could check if this is not by chance first
>> interface of an IAD-collection and if so, as
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Tim Roberts wrote:
>
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> > I think there is a way to hack the inf-file generated by
> > Zadig to install WinUSB driver for each interface.
> >
> > Interface 0 --> MI_00
> > Interface 1 --> MI_01
> > Interface 2 --> MI_02
>
> No, that won't work
You now need to push you rebased branch to update this pull request (or maybe
open a new and clean pull request).
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/pull/128#issuecomment-22595385
--
Hi Pete,
>> Forgot to add that my idea/hope was that libusbx, when setting backend
>> of a composite interface, could check if this is not by chance first
>> interface of an IAD-collection and if so, assign the same backend to the
>> other interfaces of the collection as well. But I don't know in
Okay, I've done the rebase and did my best to clean up any problems. I've run
tests/stress and it seems to work fine. Hopefully I haven't missed anything.
Are there are more refactorings that I could do to make this branch easier to
digest?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Hi Jan,
On 2013.08.13 16:15, Jan Becvar wrote:
> Forgot to add that my idea/hope was that libusbx, when setting backend
> of a composite interface, could check if this is not by chance first
> interface of an IAD-collection and if so, assign the same backend to the
> other interfaces of the collec
On 2013.08.13 00:19, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> The x86 build
> will not have the warning, the x64 version will have the warning.
Aha. Now that makes sense, and I got the warning too.
Fixed and pushed.
Regards,
/Pete
--
Ge
Closed #129 via 368d613a17a3d768a7f434b886a8299f13711f8d.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/issues/129
--
Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lit
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Ludovic Rousseau
wrote:
> The first thing you should do is git rebase upstream/master, fix any
> conflict and then push your policy branch (maybe using --force).
>
Thanks. Although I've used git before, I'd never before realized what 'git
rebase' was good for. I'll
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> I think there is a way to hack the inf-file generated by
> Zadig to install WinUSB driver for each interface.
>
> Interface 0 --> MI_00
> Interface 1 --> MI_01
> Interface 2 --> MI_02
No, that won't work. When you have an IAD that wraps those three
interfaces, usbccgp only c
On 13-Aug-13 17:07, Jan Becvar wrote:
> Note that this hack does not do any IAD parsing, it's hardcoded for the
> single device of interest with "known" device, therefore it blindly sets
> the backend of IF 0 also to IF 1&2.
Forgot to add that my idea/hope was that libusbx, when setting backend
o
> Now it seems to me currently it is not possible using
> Zadig/libwdi to achieve this.
I agree. As far as I understand, Zadig/libwdi simply offers what it gets
from the system - i.e. the "subdevices" generated by usbccgp.sys (one
subdevice only for the IAD).
I assume no inf-hacking would help
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jan Becvar wrote:
> On 13-Aug-13 16:16, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> Hmm, I am not be totally correct. I just tried one USB Web
>> Camera which is an IAD device, the first collection has two
>> interfaces (Interface count =2, Interface and Interface 1),
>> the second co
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Jan Becvar wrote:
> On 13-Aug-13 11:36, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> As replied by Tim in that thread, each interface of a USB composite
>> device is a separated one. If you only installed the supported driver for
>> the first interface, (Interface 0), then you can only
On 13-Aug-13 16:16, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> Hmm, I am not be totally correct. I just tried one USB Web
> Camera which is an IAD device, the first collection has two
> interfaces (Interface count =2, Interface and Interface 1),
> the second collection has two interface (Interface count =2,
> Interface
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Jan Becvar wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I have a question about a possible problem of accessing composite
> devices using interface association from libusbx. Not sure, but the
> problem might be related to the maling list thread
> "libusb_claim_interface() error with
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Jan Becvar wrote:
>> From my understanding of MS documentation related to IAD's handling, e.g.
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff537107%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
>> I believed that in pres
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Jan Becvar wrote:
> On 13-Aug-13 11:36, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> As replied by Tim in that thread, each interface of a USB composite
>> device is a separated one. If you only installed the supported driver for
>> the first interface, (Interface 0), then you can only
On 13-Aug-13 11:36, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> As replied by Tim in that thread, each interface of a USB composite
> device is a separated one. If you only installed the supported driver for
> the first interface, (Interface 0), then you can only claim interface 0
> with libusbx, not the other two inter
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Jan Becvar wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I have a question about a possible problem of accessing composite
> devices using interface association from libusbx. Not sure, but the
> problem might be related to the maling list thread
> "libusb_claim_interface() error with
Hi everybody,
I have a question about a possible problem of accessing composite
devices using interface association from libusbx. Not sure, but the
problem might be related to the maling list thread
"libusb_claim_interface() error with usbK driver"
(http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.p
24 matches
Mail list logo
