usbatm xusbatm.c,1.6,1.7

Roman Kagan rkagan at
Thu Apr 21 09:41:11 EDT 2005

On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 03:16:21PM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote:
> I think I prefer a different approach, based on the following
> observations: the driver *must* claim the interfaces containing
> the rx and tx endpoints; and the driver has no use for interfaces
> not containing the rx or the tx interface.  Thus, the driver
> should work out which interfaces contain the rx and tx endpoints
> and claim those.  (I notice that your patch does not check that
> the interfaces containing the rx and tx endpoints have been
> claimed).  So I suggest the following approach: when bind is
> called, check if the current interface contains the rx or the
> tx endpoint.  If not, then exit with -ENODEV.  If so, then
> work out which interface contains the other interface.  If it
> is a different interface, then claim it (if claiming fails,
> then bail out with an error).

Are you trying to say that multiple interfaces can't have overlapping
endpoints?  /me goes reread the specs...


More information about the Usbatm mailing list