From: Francisco J Ballesteros <nemo@lsub.org>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] new usb stack and implicit timeouts
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 13:30:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8ccc8ba40907190430x4254dc49l5c41c0e47b4587c@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c34a3aec111266230d3d11d03fa72684@hamnavoe.com>
> other end has something to send. Have you seen anything in the USB
> spec which indicates a timeout for reading from a bulk pipe is
> appropriate?
>
No. All devices I had tested at that time required a time out.
Ethernet came later.
I think it's better to remove the timeout from bulk endpoints (perhaps by
making it optional) and leave
it there in the case of control requests. I was just waiting to september,
to give it time to the current code to show wichever bugs it may have.
Perhaps is better not to wait.
I strongly argue in favor of in-kernel ctl timeouts. Otherwise programs like
usbd (and all drivers) will have a bad time. Moreover, I've seen
devices that block on particular requests but crash if you interrupt
them at bad times. The kernel is careful to interrupt the control
transfers without bothering the device much.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-19 11:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-19 7:16 cinap_lenrek
2009-07-19 7:21 ` Bruce Ellis
2009-07-19 7:54 ` cinap_lenrek
2009-07-19 9:07 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-07-19 11:05 ` Richard Miller
2009-07-19 11:30 ` Francisco J Ballesteros [this message]
2009-07-19 11:51 ` Richard Miller
2009-07-19 11:56 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-07-19 13:40 ` erik quanstrom
2009-07-19 13:53 ` erik quanstrom
2009-07-19 14:03 ` Richard Miller
2009-07-19 14:32 ` erik quanstrom
2009-07-19 15:14 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-07-19 15:46 ` cinap_lenrek
2009-07-19 15:58 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-07-20 7:12 ` Gorka Guardiola
2009-07-20 15:07 ` Dan Cross
2009-07-20 16:25 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-07-20 18:10 ` Lyndon Nerenberg
2009-07-20 19:51 ` Dan Cross
2009-07-21 8:51 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-07-19 15:36 ` Richard Miller
2009-07-19 11:41 ` Charles Forsyth
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8ccc8ba40907190430x4254dc49l5c41c0e47b4587c@mail.gmail.com \
--to=nemo@lsub.org \
--cc=9fans@9fans.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).