Hi Kay: Kay Sievers wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 23:32, Marcel Holtmann<marcel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Now it's getting funny. We need to call the nonsense two times to make > it work? We need to fix the real issue here instead of doing guesswork > and adding hacks like this. Any idea what's going on with the first > scan? The device node is guaranteed to exist when we call stuff from > RUN+= instructions. > > I'm not sure what's going on here, but I think i'll just go down that road of pulling the necessary code out of libusb's find_devices to just craft a usb_device object with the information we already have so there is no necessary scanning in the first place. There will still be a dependency on libusb to be able to send a usb_control_msg, claim, etc, but at least the time consuming, unnecessary scan will be gone. > > Well, libusb might be ok for stuff that just searches things which are > always there, it's definitely not suitable to be used in conjunction > with udev. The entire coldplug with 500 devices takes ~0.5 seconds > here, while a single call to libusb takes ~0.15 just to find the > device we already have. That alone is not acceptable, and now we > should call the useless scan twice? Tsss ... :) > Yeah I understand. I'll follow up after I get something else together. -- Mario Limonciello *Dell | Linux Engineering* mario_limonciello@xxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
