W dniu 11.07.2014 15:22, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior pisze:
On 07/10/2014 04:17 PM, Krzysztof Opasiak wrote:
another class ? Please don't, we already have the udc class, we
could find a way to just use that instead.
Using udc clas is not a good idea. This may cause failures in userspace.
failures? like what?
How would you like to tell that this is not really a udc? Only type of
Adding a new class for one file does not look right. Try to add a file
if you have to but without creating a new class for it.
It looks like it would fit best in the configfs root directory.
I guess you mean:
$ mount -t configfs none $CONFIGFS_ROOT
$ ls $CONFIGFS_ROOT/usb_gadget
func_list
However, I am not sure this is required at all. I would rather prefer
having a userland tool (like target has) which helps you assembling a
gadget instead of having users poking at files and then "eh look! lets
see what this can do…".
A userland tool for assembling gadgets with configfs needs to know what
it can or cannot do, that is, what usb functions are available.
Knowing what functions there are is not the same thing as being able
to discover it, so in fact this looks like a philosophical issue:
whether userspace should be able to discover what usb functions
there are or not?
AP
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
