On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 03:10:31AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > We need to eat our own dog food. I agree, but this patch seems too big. I have a different patch floating around that did this that seemed less intrusive than this. One example being: > /* from USB 2.0 spec and updates */ > -#define USB_DT_DEVICE_QUALIFIER 0x06 > -#define USB_DT_OTHER_SPEED_CONFIG 0x07 > -#define USB_DT_OTG 0x09 > -#define USB_DT_DEBUG 0x0a > -#define USB_DT_INTERFACE_ASSOCIATION 0x0b > -#define USB_DT_SECURITY 0x0c > -#define USB_DT_KEY 0x0d > -#define USB_DT_ENCRYPTION_TYPE 0x0e > -#define USB_DT_BOS 0x0f > -#define USB_DT_DEVICE_CAPABILITY 0x10 > -#define USB_DT_WIRELESS_ENDPOINT_COMP 0x11 > -#define USB_DT_WIRE_ADAPTER 0x21 > -#define USB_DT_RPIPE 0x22 > -#define USB_DT_RC_INTERFACE 0x23 > -#define USB_DT_SS_ENDPOINT_COMP 0x30 > +#define LIBUSB_DT_DEVICE_QUALIFIER 0x06 > +#define LIBUSB_DT_OTHER_SPEED_CONFIG 0x07 > +#define LIBUSB_DT_OTG 0x09 <snip> Are these #defines needed to be renamed? Is there a namespace confusion? I think that makes the patch bigger than I expected. 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
