Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:46:38AM +0300, Tanya Brokhman wrote: > > Which leaves a question about the composite gadget framework. Should > > it be updated with SS support? Probably not until the various function > > drivers have all been updated. > > As I mentioned, updating all of the gadget drivers will take a long time and > I don't fill confident enough doing since I'm not familiar with all of them > and don't have the ability to test each of them properly. I can add SS > descriptors to f_mass_storage, g_zero if it helps and of course f_uasp > already has them. > I'm a bit confused by this actually... We've been discussing this patch > series for quite a while now and I got the impression that except for some > minor comments you were all for excepting this. Was I wrong or am I > misunderstanding the above? > In any case, I don't feel that adding SS support for the Gadget framework > should be delayed until all gadget drivers add SS descriptors because this > patch series will give the developers the ability to test these gadget > drivers at SS. Also, several developers addressed me offline with questions > on this series so I know people are using it in their work. And of course we > do :) just remove the hunk which changes composite.c speed field and it should all be ok :-) -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
