[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87oaapgj5j.fsf@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 16:04:56 +0200
From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>
To: Felipe Ferreri Tonello <eu@...ipetonello.com>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] usb: gadget: gmidi: remove bus powered requirement on bmAttributes
Hi,
Felipe Ferreri Tonello <eu@...ipetonello.com> writes:
>>> its easy and simple to setup and use. So I think before we have some
>>
>> so is configfs.
>>
>>> sort of preset library of configfs-based gadget drivers, we still need
>>> these modules.
>>
>> there is already a library called libusbg.
>
> By preset library I meant scripts or little programs that implement the
> legacy drivers we have.
like this ?
https://github.com/libusbgx/libusbgx/blob/master/examples/gadget-midi.c
>>> Any suggestions on that?
>>>
>>> Do you want to support what I am proposing for gmidi.ko or just ignore
>>> it and move on to configfs?
>>
>> I prefer to not touch these gadget drivers if at all necessary. If you
>> fixing a bug, then sure we must fix bugs. But you're not fixing a bug
>> and, on top of that, you're adding regressions and violating the USB
>> spec. This shows that you're writing these patches without knowing
>> (and/or even caring about) the specification at all.
>
> Yes, I see your point. My mistake was to not to enforce the first bit to
> be set enabling the user to break the USB spec. I didn't think of that
right, that was the problem.
> scenario. And that's why it's always useful to have kernel maintainers
> and others to provide such insights. :)
yeah, no problem ;-)
--
balbi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (819 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists