On Wed, 13 Jan 2010, Hans de Goede wrote: > > If we do this unconditionally blocking disconnect is a bad idea. We'd > > better introduce a new ioctl, like USBDEVFS_RELEASE_IDLE_INTERFACE, > > to lave user space the option to kick a driver off a busy device. > > > > Introducing a new ioctl which can be blocked by the drivers would be fine > with me. I'm in contact with the libgphoto2 devs (I mostly to the kernel > webcam driver side myself), and I'm sure I can sell that to them :) How would such an ioctl work? The usbfs code has no way of knowing whether an interface is currently idle. 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
