that's what I understood. In any case I'll run the code through all devices I have before sending any usb patch. I'm still not sure that some disks currently working won't cease working if they do their own timeouts. I just want to be sure.
I placed timeouts there only when I found uncooperative devices, in practice. In theory, not even ctl timeouts are needed. (I should get crc/timeout errors even in those cases according to the std). but I have learned the hard way not to trust any usb std. On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 4:32 PM, erik quanstrom<quans...@quanstro.net> wrote: >> > isn't it easier to set >> > up time timeout at the beginning? >> >> Not if you use normal read/write to talk to usb endpoints (which >> seems to me a Good Thing). Normal read/write system call doesn't >> have a timeout argument. > > do you mean "normal read/write" vs. an rpc protocol, say, like > /dev/sdXX/raw? > > - erik > >
