On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 21:14:28 +0200 Frank Schäfer <fschaefer.oss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I have a question about the following code in gspca.c: > > in function gspca_dev_probe(...): > ... > /* the USB video interface must be the first one */ > if (dev->config->desc.bNumInterfaces != 1 > && intf->cur_altsetting->desc.bInterfaceNumber != 0) > return -ENODEV; > ... > > Is there a special reason for not allowing devices with USB interface > index > 0 for video ? > I'm experimenting with a device that has the video interface at index 3 > and two audio interfaces at index 0 and 1 (index two is missing !). > And the follow-up question: can we assume that all device handled by the > gspca-driver have vendor specific video interfaces ? > Then we could change the code to > > ... > /* the USB video interface must be of class vendor */ > if (intf->cur_altsetting->desc.bInterfaceClass != > USB_CLASS_VENDOR_SPEC) > return -ENODEV; > ... Hi Frank, For webcam devices, the interface class is meaningful only when set to USB_CLASS_VIDEO (UVC). Otherwise, I saw many different values. For video on a particular interface, the subdriver must call the function gspca_dev_probe2() as this is done in spca1528 and xirlink_cit. Regards. -- Ken ar c'hentañ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! ** Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
