That's very interesting. So I poked around a little bit based on what
you discovered. Namely that usbmodules behaves differently. Turns
out that comes from the package usbutils. In portage there are four
versions available:
0.71-r1
0.71
0.11-r6
0.11-r5
I thought perhaps it was a patch that Gen
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 21:01 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> That's what I suggested in the first place as well. I still think it's a
> good idea, fwiw :)
OK smarty pants ... some of us are a bit slower on the uptake. How
about this then. It won't solve the target problem, but it will solve
the device
On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 04:42:43PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 21:01 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > That's what I suggested in the first place as well. I still think it's a
> > good idea, fwiw :)
>
> OK smarty pants ... some of us are a bit slower on the uptake. How
> abou
Thanks David. Loved the Gadget API. :)
I am pretty sure i didnt see any example gadgetfs based driver.
I am trying to implement a PTP/MTP class driver. Pretty much nailed most
of the PTP portions, trying to get the interface to the gadgetfs in
place...
David Brownell wrote:
On Thursday 16 Fe
On Thursday 16 February 2006 10:09 pm, Vishal Borker wrote:
> Hi all,
> A quick question. I am trying to get the gadgetfs up on my dev board. I
> loaded the Low level controller driver, and loaded the gadgetfs module
> over it. Cant see to see the /dev/gadgetfs/ directory. Am i missing
> someth
On Thursday 16 February 2006 10:31 pm, Kiran Jammula wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am working on Hynix ARM based SOC with USB type B. We are using Linux as
> OS for the same. I need to Implement Mass storage device protocole for our
> system. Hynix Provides
> Hardware Based enumeration. To use USB devic
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Vishal Borker wrote:
> Hi all,
> A quick question. I am trying to get the gadgetfs up on my dev board.
> I loaded the Low level controller driver, and loaded the gadgetfs module
> over it. Cant see to see the /dev/gadgetfs/ directory. Am i missing
> something.
You have t
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Mukund JB. wrote:
> Dear Alan,
>
> >> After that see the Table 5-1. Low-speed Control Transfer Limits.
> >> Even though there are a total of 43 bytes to be transferred, I
> observe
> >> that data payload is less that 8 bytes some times which is against
> the
> >> above rule i
