Am Dienstag, 28. Mai 2002 06:39 schrieb Matthew Dharm:
> Right, but I presume that the device will need to access the data that
> has been sent, yes? So the device needs to understand the FS too...
In that case, yes indeed, the device needs to understand the filesystem.
Regards
On Sun, May 26, 2002 at 11:50:44PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, May 26, 2002 at 11:40:50PM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> > Hrm... okay, what's the best BK way to handle this? Do I generate a new
> > changeset to fix this, or go back into an older tree and generate a
> > different solution/chan
Right, but I presume that the device will need to access the data that has
been sent, yes? So the device needs to understand the FS too...
Matt
On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 06:31:18AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> > > Would the device also need to implement some sort of file system, such
> > > as
> > Would the device also need to implement some sort of file system, such
> > as ext2?
>
> Yes, probably. The protocol operates at the block layer... unless you
> can store what you need using block-level access, some filesystem
> support will be needed.
But let's not scare the guy.
The kerne
On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 04:54:37AM +0100, Ben wrote:
>
> I am currently researching an idea I've had for an engineering
> project... part of which involves transferring files from a Linux
> machine to a USB device with solid state storage.
>
> Am I correct in thinking that no drivers will be n
I am currently researching an idea I've had for an engineering
project... part of which involves transferring files from a Linux
machine to a USB device with solid state storage.
Am I correct in thinking that no drivers will be needed under Linux if
the device identifies itself as mass storag
There also a number of files in drivers/usb/media;
[antonia] /usr/src/linux-2.5.18/drivers/usb/media > ls *~
konicawc.c~ ov511.c~ pwc-if.c~ usbvideo.c~
Didn't mention it as yet as I meant to see if there were patches for these
on the list.
On Mon, 27 May 2002, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> In case
Dear Greg,
Greg KH wrote:
>
> Ok, now that 2.5.16 is out, we have a total of 4 different USB UHCI
> controller drivers in the kernel! That's about 3 too many for me :)
...
1. I tried uhci-hcd and usb-uhci-hcd with linux-2.5.18 and in both cases
I get "usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout" while readi
> Apparently, in drivers/net/irda is a file usb-irda which references the
> next field of an URB, which no longer exists in 2.5.x
>
> I don't know how to fix it, but I thought someone might like to know.
In "irda-usb.c" just delete the text that's disabling that feature... :)
___
In case anyone is interested
Apparently, in drivers/net/irda is a file usb-irda which references the
next field of an URB, which no longer exists in 2.5.x
I don't know how to fix it, but I thought someone might like to know.
Matt
--
Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL
> How about we require driver level locking for interface level control
> requests?
How would that be enforced?
> Like if you want to disable a port, you are required to do it through
> the hub driver (in some other way we haven't defined yet). That we way
> ensure coherency with any loaded dri
Hi,
Just to inform you that I have a peripheral (Toshiba PDR-M70 Camera)
that recently started to work with uhci (on 2.4.19-pre8). It still does
not work with usb-uhci.
It also works with ohci.
Thanks,
Jean-Denis GIRARD
___
Don
Hi.
Have you already uploaded the new firmware? There is a bug in the old
(original) firmware which causes problems with linux.
Have a look at
http://www.qbik.ch/usb/devices/showdev.php?id=491
and download the new firmware from
http://www.cypress.com/cfuploads/support/reference_design/C7
On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 03:45:51PM +0200, Eduard Hasenleithner wrote:
> Georg Acher wrote:
>
> Replying a bit late, but better than never.
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 11:43:51PM +0200, Eduard Hasenleithner wrote:
>
> > > May 10 22:57:52 editower kernel: usb.c: USB device not accepting new
> > >
Georg Acher wrote:
Replying a bit late, but better than never.
On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 11:43:51PM +0200, Eduard Hasenleithner wrote:
> > May 10 22:57:52 editower kernel: usb.c: USB device not accepting new
> > address=2 (error=-110)
> > May 10 22:57:53 editower kernel: hub.c: USB new device
On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 01:17:58PM +0200, Johann Deneux wrote:
> Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
> >I can only see 2 reasons for putting it into the HCD: OHCI and EHCI
> >handle it implicitily and for speed.
> >
> >There is a strong desire to keep bulk fast, but I can't come up with a
> >reason for contro
Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
>
>
> I can only see 2 reasons for putting it into the HCD: OHCI and EHCI
> handle it implicitily and for speed.
>
> There is a strong desire to keep bulk fast, but I can't come up with a
> reason for control to be faster.
>
It depends on what you mean by fast. I am t
17 matches
Mail list logo
