Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 09:58:22PM -0800, Miles Lane wrote:
>
>> We should go through some formal decision process, rather than
>> deciding to use uhci just because its kinks are worked out. The other
>> factors should be weighed before we make our choice.
>
>
> If you remem
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 09:58:22PM -0800, Miles Lane wrote:
> We should go through some formal decision process, rather than
> deciding to use uhci just because its kinks are worked out. The other
> factors should be weighed before we make our choice.
If you remember the last time we tried to d
On 15 Mar 2001 19:39:31 -0500, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2001, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 04:41:21PM -0500, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
> > > The patch I released a couple of weeks ago fixes almost all of the known
> > > issues with my UHCI driver an
On 15 Mar 2001 12:40:26 -0800, Dunlap, Randy wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Miles Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > Are we going to have two UHCI HCDs _forever_?
> > It makes no sense to continue trying to fix and add identical
> > features to two drivers. As it stands, so
I have found some erroneous behaviour in the usb-uhci driver while
trying to debug a problem with the Keyspan USB serial adaptor driver.
The problem relates to data toggles on transfers to/from bulk
endpoints which get cancelled before they complete. Briefly, what
happens is that if you submit a
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 04:13:51PM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> Another option is to keep maintaining both UHCIs for now,
> and choose one as the start for a new one that will kick
> off the 2.5 UHCI work (which I'm assuming will try hard to
> share HCI code with at least OHCI and EHCI drivers).
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 07:39:31PM -0500, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
>
> If you don't mind bulk queuing not working, then I'll send it to you :)
That's the exact problem that I was looking to be fixed, so I'll pass
for now. Thanks though :)
greg k-h
--
greg@(kroah|wirex).com
__
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 04:41:21PM -0500, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
> > The patch I released a couple of weeks ago fixes almost all of the known
> > issues with my UHCI driver and I've fixed the rest (but one bug) since
> > then.
>
> Do you
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 04:41:21PM -0500, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
> The patch I released a couple of weeks ago fixes almost all of the known
> issues with my UHCI driver and I've fixed the rest (but one bug) since
> then.
Do you have a copy of this updated patch so that some of us can test
it out
Another option is to keep maintaining both UHCIs for now,
and choose one as the start for a new one that will kick
off the 2.5 UHCI work (which I'm assuming will try hard to
share HCI code with at least OHCI and EHCI drivers).
Although "uhci" works best for what I've tried, I'm not
sure there's a
Why don't you submit it to him and let him decide? Or at least to Alan Cox,
if you haven't already...
Regards -- Andy
> The problem I'm seeing is getting the necessary patches applied. The
> patches are quite large.
>
> I really want to get the PCI DMA patches integrated, but it's pretty
> larg
> > Are we going to have two UHCI HCDs _forever_?
> > It makes no sense to continue trying to fix and add identical
> > features to two drivers. As it stands, some device drivers
> > work better with each UHCI HCD. Can't we just pick one
> > driver and fix it? This "eeny meeny miney moe" situa
The device specification says its a HID class device.
It's working in Windows.
But the descriptor structure in linux has 0xFF for DeviceClass,
DeviceSubClass & DeviceProtocol ( Vendor specific ? ).
That's why i started writing a seperate driver.
I am supposed to use set_report for sending data
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001, Dunlap, Randy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Miles Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > Are we going to have two UHCI HCDs _forever_?
> > It makes no sense to continue trying to fix and add identical
> > features to two drivers. As it
Are you sure it's an HID class device? Most of these devices are Storage
Class or Vendor Specific.
Matt
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 10:35:04PM +0530, hariharan swaminathan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am new to usb-driver programming.
> I am trying to write a usb driver for a smartcard reader
> The device i
> -Original Message-
> From: Miles Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Are we going to have two UHCI HCDs _forever_?
> It makes no sense to continue trying to fix and add identical
> features to two drivers. As it stands, some device drivers
> work better with each UHCI HCD. Can't we ju
Are we going to have two UHCI HCDs _forever_?
It makes no sense to continue trying to fix and add identical
features to two drivers. As it stands, some device drivers
work better with each UHCI HCD. Can't we just pick one
driver and fix it? This "eeny meeny miney moe" situation
is goofy.
M
Hi David,
basically, I like the idea of shared HCI code.
If you want you can see my patches as a step in that direction.
I would expect a common architecture in Kernel 2.5.
But first a short history:
a lot of the changes of the m8xxhci driver I have done in
november and december. I had a seriou
Hi,
I am new to usb-driver programming.
I am trying to write a usb driver for a smartcard reader
The device is supposed to fall under HID class.
How to configure the hid driver to recognize this device ?
This device has 1 intr endpoint & data is to be transfered thro' cntrl endpoint.
My irq hand
Roman,
Thanks for posting that!
> Patch 2: replaces the 'old fashioned' roothub process with a
> virtual root hub and also uses the bus wires to detect new devices
> (this makes it more conform with how other Linux USB-host-driver
> like OHCI and UHCI manages the root-hub
> and the detecti
** Reply to message from Kári Davíðsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 15 Mar 2001
09:06:16 -
Thanks for that, but I've also tried that (mountpoints 1thru4) and all have the
same result
Sorry I didn't mention that earlier. (I don't think there's anything else to
say, except that I've tried both
Shouldn't you be mounting the first partition of the disk, i.e.
mount -tvfat /dev/sdb1 /mnt/camera ?
Just a thought.
K.D.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
22 matches
Mail list logo
