Hi, Felipe Ferreri Tonello <eu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> its easy and simple to setup and use. So I think before we have some >> >> so is configfs. >> >>> sort of preset library of configfs-based gadget drivers, we still need >>> these modules. >> >> there is already a library called libusbg. > > By preset library I meant scripts or little programs that implement the > legacy drivers we have. like this ? https://github.com/libusbgx/libusbgx/blob/master/examples/gadget-midi.c >>> Any suggestions on that? >>> >>> Do you want to support what I am proposing for gmidi.ko or just ignore >>> it and move on to configfs? >> >> I prefer to not touch these gadget drivers if at all necessary. If you >> fixing a bug, then sure we must fix bugs. But you're not fixing a bug >> and, on top of that, you're adding regressions and violating the USB >> spec. This shows that you're writing these patches without knowing >> (and/or even caring about) the specification at all. > > Yes, I see your point. My mistake was to not to enforce the first bit to > be set enabling the user to break the USB spec. I didn't think of that right, that was the problem. > scenario. And that's why it's always useful to have kernel maintainers > and others to provide such insights. :) yeah, no problem ;-) -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
