On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Alan Stern wrote:
> > This suggests that a lot of the work in usbhid_start should be
> > performed earlier, before calling hid_add_device. After all, why
> > bother registering a USB device on the input bus if usbhid isn't going
> > to be able to drive it?
>
> None of the code can be moved to the usbhid probe function, because all
> of it depends on the driver's (potential) report_fixup.
>
> However I suggest moving this test to the probe which ensures performing
> the test early enough.
That makes sense. It's the only failure mode in usbhid_start which
isn't a simple out-of-memory error.
> Andi, could you test the attached patch?
>
> --
>
> Some devices have no input interrupt endpoint. These won't be handled
> by usbhid, but currently they are not refused and reside on hid bus.
>
> Perform this checking earlier so that we refuse to control such
> a device early enough (and not pass it to the hid bus at all).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@xxxxxxxxx>
> + for (n = 0; n < interface->desc.bNumEndpoints; n++)
> + if (usb_endpoint_dir_in(&interface->endpoint[n].desc))
> + has_in++;
> + if (!has_in) {
> + dev_err(&intf->dev, "couldn't find an input interrupt "
> + "endpoint");
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> +
Do you want to use usb_endpoint_is_int_in() instead? It matches the
error message more closely.
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
