On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 19:55, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:16:53PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: >> I don't see any point in putting endpoints on the usb bus. They might >> as well remain "busless", if at all possible. So we would have >> >> /sys/bus/usb/devices/4-0:1.0/4-0:1.0_ep81/ >> >> or even just >> >> /sys/bus/usb/devices/4-0:1.0/ep81/ > > Heh, that's what they used to be :) > > But then we wanted a /dev node for them, so they had to belong to some > bus/class in order for them to be able to notify udev that a device node > needs to be generated. I like the busless devices, but if we need them as device with device nodes, we need to stick them somewhere, right. To carry device nodes, they need to be uniquely named not to clash, we can not have several "ep80" devices. I would still like to add them to the "usb" bus, and prefix them with the interface name just like interfaces are prefixed with the device name, like: .../usb3/3-2/3-2.2/ .../usb3/3-2/3-2.2/3-2.2:1.0 .../usb3/3-2/3-2.2/3-2.2:1.0/3-2.2:1.0-ep81 Thanks, Kay -- 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
