pulling the device gets me a "crc/timeout error", not a "request timed out".
but i'm not sure if this is always the case though. the driver should not artificially generate errors in my opinion even if it would be convinient for some userspace drivers to have it. those who need a timeout should choose ther own value depending on what they are doing. -- cinap
--- Begin Message ---The only justification I can see is to disconnect to stuff that's been unplugged or misbehaves. In your case that's not true. brucee On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 5:16 PM, <cinap_len...@gmx.de> wrote: > 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 > > >
--- End Message ---
