From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <06cb592e495ddaf9655a4d0ffae3c661@gmx.de>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 09:16:34 +0200
From: cinap_lenrek@gmx.de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [9fans] new usb stack and implicit timeouts
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 26eeb976-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

from the manpage:

          For control, bulk, and isochronous transfers, there is an
          implicit timeout performed by the kernel and it is not nec-
          essary for applications to place their own timers.  For
          interrupt transfers, the kernel will not time out any opera-
          tion.

souldnt the application / userspace driver know better than some
random choosen timeout in the kernel driver?

also, this has not been taken into account for the new usb/ether.

for now i'll just compare the errstr and try again, but this implicit
timeout stuff just smells "too smart" for me.

--
cinap