Hi, On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 11:58:30AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > The endpoint naming convention currently determines type and direction. > > > It works okay for simple cases but not for more complicated ones. For > > > example, it can't handle endpoints that support bulk or interrupt but > > > not isochronous. If you really want to make this general, the way to > > > do it is to have separate bitflags for: control, bulk-in, bulk-out, ... > > > > not bulk-in/bulk-out. I was thinking of having transfer and direction > > completely separated. Or would there be cases where endpoint support > > bulk in/out but isoc in-only ? > > > > I don't think so... > > Yeah, you're probably right. But you still need flags for the two > directions. I'm pretty sure there are endpoints that are in-only or > out-only. perfect, I'll start working on this in a couple weeks (will travel on Sunday) then I'll send finalized patches which I'll test with dummy_hcd only since I'll, likely, still lack HW. -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
