On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
> On 2012.08.31 11:13, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> I have seen some potential issues with USB composite
>> device (FT2232H based JTAG debugger) with libusbK or
>> libusb0.sys (filter or device driver) when I tested OpenOCD
>> 0.6.0-rc2 with libusbx git
Many thanks for the tests.
It looks like composite is broken alright, and has been since 10540
[1]. There's some breakage in set_composite_interface(), where the
change introduced in 10540 means we're only getting one interface
populated, and I'm also seeing file handles not being initialized on
[1]
https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/commit/e82c677b5f10a966c89f6b58caa1ae4341260527
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed an
Hi,
On 09/02/2012 03:47 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
>> On 2012.08.31 20:40, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> This assumes that the winusb flag causes the ep to halt when the short
>>> read is encountered
>
> Couldn't see much in NetMon, but it looks like even after WinUSB returns
> a short read error, and if I
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 09/02/2012 03:47 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
> >> On 2012.08.31 20:40, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>> This assumes that the winusb flag causes the ep to halt when the short
> >>> read is encountered
> >
> > Couldn't see much in NetMon, but
On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Orin Eman wrote:
> > Then as said that is a pretty useless feature, since apps can already
> > find out as much by comparing the amount actually read versus the amount
> > they requested...
> >
>
>
> Not quite. Without allow partial reads, if your buffer length isn't a
> mul
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Orin Eman wrote:
>
> > > Then as said that is a pretty useless feature, since apps can already
> > > find out as much by comparing the amount actually read versus the
> amount
> > > they requested...
> > >
> >
> >
> > Not quit
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:15 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Orin Eman wrote:
>
>> Not quite. Without allow partial reads, if your buffer length isn't a
>> multiple of the maximum packet size for the endpoint and the device returns
>> more than your buffer length, you can lose data. W
On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Orin Eman wrote:
> > it has a limitation on transfer size. Do you know what a typical value
> > for MAXIMUM_TRANSFER_SIZE is?
> >
>
>
> I don't, but comments on the OSR ntdev forum indicate in the order of MB
> for high speed devices, hundreds of KB for low and full speed de
