2006/3/23, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Monday 20 March 2006 1:50 am, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
>
> > Same question for usb->pullup. Who is supposed to call this method ?
>
> The gadget driver, if it wants to support a mode where it's not always
> active. For example, maybe the kernel comp
On Monday 20 March 2006 1:50 am, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> Same question for usb->pullup. Who is supposed to call this method ?
The gadget driver, if it wants to support a mode where it's not always
active. For example, maybe the kernel component needs to be configured
from userspace -- opened by
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 20 March 2006 8:59 am, Alan Stern wrote:
> > There are other times when the UDC driver might not disable endpoints,
> > however. For example, when the cable is unplugged (a disconnect event).
> > The gadget API doesn't specify whether endpo
On Monday 20 March 2006 8:59 am, Alan Stern wrote:
> There are other times when the UDC driver might not disable endpoints,
> however. For example, when the cable is unplugged (a disconnect event).
> The gadget API doesn't specify whether endpoints are automatically
> disabled by the UDC driver
On Tuesday 21 March 2006 9:08 am, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
>
> > IMHO, sometimes it's pretty hard to know how things should be done
> > that is what should be part of the gadget driver or part of the UDC
> > driver.
>
> For a gadget driver author it's not har
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> 2006/3/20, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > You mean, why doesn't file_storage.c always delegate the job to the UDC
> > driver when it unregisters? It does. You can see this by looking through
> > the fsg_unbind() routine. It doesn't call usb_
2006/3/20, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> You mean, why doesn't file_storage.c always delegate the job to the UDC
> driver when it unregisters? It does. You can see this by looking through
> the fsg_unbind() routine. It doesn't call usb_ep_disable() anywhere.
well I think it does indirectl
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> Hi Alan
>
> 2006/3/20, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> >
> > > I'm wondering who is supposed to release/disable the endpoints which
> > > have been enabled while the usb driver was running. I took a look
Hi Alan
2006/3/20, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
>
> > I'm wondering who is supposed to release/disable the endpoints which
> > have been enabled while the usb driver was running. I took a look to 2
> > different drivers, zero and file_storage drivers
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> I'm wondering who is supposed to release/disable the endpoints which
> have been enabled while the usb driver was running. I took a look to 2
> different drivers, zero and file_storage drivers, and they both make a
> different assumption. The former is
I'm wondering who is supposed to release/disable the endpoints which
have been enabled while the usb driver was running. I took a look to 2
different drivers, zero and file_storage drivers, and they both make a
different assumption. The former is relying on the udc to release its
previously allocat
11 matches
Mail list logo
