On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 09:50:25PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > 2009/4/28 Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxxx>: > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 00:17, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 01:38:09PM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > >>> On Monday 27 April 2009, Greg KH wrote: > >>> > Here's 3 patches that removes the usb_host class, and the two current > >>> > users of it, as it isn't really needed. > >>> > > >>> > Any objections to these patches? > >>> > >>> You seem to be doing some spring cleaning on the USB stack ... ;) > >> > >> Heh, yeah, it needs it in places :) > > > > We could need spring several times in a year. :) > > > > What about moving the endpoints to the "usb" bus instead of its own > > weird class? I don't really know why there is an enpoint class at all, > > Yes, I agree. Maybe endpoint class was introduced to help implementing > usbfs2, which is obsolete now, seems. No, it's not obsolete, just not finished. The main developer of it got sidetracked by a real job and implementing USB 3.0 :) > > and what makes them different from usb-devices or usb-interfaces? The > > endpoints are part of the core just like the interfaces are, right? > > Yes, endpoint 0 is part of usb device, and other endpoints should belong to > interface. As it does today, right? thanks, greg k-h -- 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
