Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: usb-storage

2002-05-05 Thread Sancho Dauskardt
> >Last Tuesday ("Queens Birthday" - a holiday in Holland) >I did the reading part, and this evening the writing part >for this animal. I see that you also did reading, more or >less in the same way, but you did not have writing code? Yep, me lazy animal. For our app we only needed read-access,

[linux-usb-devel] Re: assignment of minors under dynamic scheme

2002-05-05 Thread Greg KH
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 12:47:29PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Sonntag, 5. Mai 2002 01:17 schrieb Greg KH: > > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 12:03:09AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > under the dynamic scheme, you hand out all a driver's minors at once. > > > Why did you decide on

[linux-usb-devel] PATCH : Detect Motorola V60C phone

2002-05-05 Thread Nick Papadonis
--- linux-2.4.18-orig/drivers/usb/acm.c Fri Oct 5 15:06:08 2001 +++ linux/drivers/usb/acm.c Mon May 6 01:51:09 2002 @@ -650,6 +650,9 @@ static struct usb_device_id acm_ids[] = { { USB_DEVICE_INFO(USB_CLASS_COMM, 0, 0) }, + /* Motorola V60C Phone - has non-zero sub-class node

Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: usb-storage

2002-05-05 Thread Andries . Brouwer
From: Sancho Dauskardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Forget datafab.c for this, as the protocoll is a little different. > >Hm. I used datafab.c successfully for the CF side. >What precisely is different? It's a while ago, but if I remember correctly, the ACOMdATA (actually

Re: [linux-usb-devel] USB snooper for linux?

2002-05-05 Thread David Brownell
> What I think would be very useful would be if the usb-developers could > allocate a new libpcap frame type for USB packets. > And then provide an API in the usb subsystem so that libpcap could > sniff data in the same way as libpcap today can sniff packets from > various types of NICs and WANlin

[linux-usb-devel] PATCH ehci -- interrupt xfer requeue

2002-05-05 Thread David Brownell
Can you merge this patch into the latest from Linus and Marcelo? It's against 2.5.13 but, with "-p4", works against 2.4.19-pre8 too. The fix basically removes a bit-complement that shouldn't have been there. (Plus related simplification.) That changed the PID, so that (for one example) only the

Re: [linux-usb-devel] USB snooper for linux?

2002-05-05 Thread Marc Britten
On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 19:56, Brad Hards wrote: > On Sun, 5 May 2002 01:41, Marc Britten wrote: > > modinfo -p usbcore or modinfo -p usb-uhci both return nothing so i'm > > assuming they have no module options to turn up debugging. > I looked at uhci - you might try that (since JE probably does

Re: [linux-usb-devel] PATCH: To allow Mot. v60 detected

2002-05-05 Thread Nick Papadonis
Brad Hards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Also found in your later post. > The reason why this is needed is that the device is advertising a non-zero > Device sub-class code. > That is, the line that says: > D: Ver= 1.10 Cls=02(comm.) Sub=02 Prot=00 MxPS= 8 #Cfgs= 1 > should read > D: Ver= 1.10

[linux-usb-devel] small correction

2002-05-05 Thread Oliver Neukum
I fired too early. Regards Oliver You can import this changeset into BK by piping this whole message to: '| bk receive [path to repository]' or apply the patch as usual. === [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2002-05-05 12

Re: [linux-usb-devel] freeing minors in probe error path

2002-05-05 Thread Oliver Neukum
> Good catch, but unless I'm missing something from just looking at the > patch rather than the whole 2.5 version of the code, it appears that the > "usblp->minor >= USBLP_MINORS" error may be improperly handled here, > because "usb_deregister_dev (&usblp_driver, 1, usblp->minor)" will > be called

Re: [linux-usb-devel] freeing minors in probe error path

2002-05-05 Thread David Paschal
Oliver Neukum wrote: > you fail to free minors if something goes wrong in probe. ... > usblp->minor++; > if (usblp->minor >= USBLP_MINORS) { > err("no more free usblp devices"); > - goto abort; >

[linux-usb-devel] Re: freeing minors in probe error path

2002-05-05 Thread Vojtech Pavlik
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 12:57:54PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Hi, > > you fail to free minors if something goes wrong in probe. > > Regards > Oliver Thanks for the fix! > You can import this changeset into BK by piping this whole message to: > '| bk receive [path to rep

[linux-usb-devel] USB snooper for linux?

2002-05-05 Thread Ronnie Sahlberg
Hi list. Regarding snooper for Linux. What I think would be very useful would be if the usb-developers could allocate a new libpcap frame type for USB packets. And then provide an API in the usb subsystem so that libpcap could sniff data in the same way as libpcap today can sniff packets from va

[linux-usb-devel] freeing minors in probe error path

2002-05-05 Thread Oliver Neukum
Hi, you fail to free minors if something goes wrong in probe. Regards Oliver You can import this changeset into BK by piping this whole message to: '| bk receive [path to repository]' or apply the patch as usual. ==

[linux-usb-devel] Re: assignment of minors under dynamic scheme

2002-05-05 Thread Oliver Neukum
Am Sonntag, 5. Mai 2002 01:17 schrieb Greg KH: > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 12:03:09AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Hi, > > > > under the dynamic scheme, you hand out all a driver's minors at once. > > Why did you decide on that ? The largest number of devices could be > > supported if a minor wer