On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Kay Sievers wrote: > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 20:10, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:51:44AM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > >> On Wednesday 29 April 2009, Alan Stern wrote: > >> > I don't see any point in putting endpoints on the usb bus. Â They might > >> > as well remain "busless", if at all possible. > >> > >> So long as they stay in the right part of the driver tree ... > >> > So we would have > >> > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â /sys/bus/usb/devices/4-0:1.0/4-0:1.0_ep81/ > >> > or even just > >> > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â /sys/bus/usb/devices/4-0:1.0/ep81/ > >> > but not > >> > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â /sys/bus/usb/devices/4-0:1.0_ep81/ > >> > >> And in all cases, I'd still prefer "ep1-in" or "ep12-out" > >> to "ep81" and "ep0c". > > > > Nah, that's not the "address" :) > > Oh, there is the symlink already with the the "address", so we are > free to name the device, right? We might as well be consistent with the device names. Things like "4-2.3" aren't addresses either; they are link paths. Alan Stern -- 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
