From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <1381313165a5f22aeb8498f958cd7513@hamnavoe.com>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
From: Richard Miller <9fans@hamnavoe.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 12:51:39 +0100
In-Reply-To: <8ccc8ba40907190430x4254dc49l5c41c0e47b4587c@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] new usb stack and implicit timeouts
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 271b531e-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> I think it's better to remove the timeout from bulk endpoints (perhaps by
> making it optional)

There's already a general way to time out any read/write operation
alarm() and notify().  Why add a special case option for one particular
type of file?  I would say just remove it.

>
> I strongly argue in favor of in-kernel ctl timeouts.

Yes, the control endpoint has a well-defined RPC protocol and
lack of response is always an error.