On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:04:37AM +0100, Daan Vreeken [PA4DAN] wrote: > For the device this means having to switch the ROM image with the RAM image > which is impossible while running in the specific processor. Thus the > processor tells it's core to map RAM into code-space and resets itself. After > that the device will apear again with address = 0. > The host then needs to set the address, re-read the device descriptor (it has > changes, the device now offers endpoints etc), attach a driver. > > Btw, a reset can be sent down to a usb device from within a driver with this > line of code : > > usb_port_status_t stat; > > usbd_reset_port(sc->atuwi_udev->myhub, > sc->atuwi_udev->powersrc->portno, &stat);
Im mostly worried about having more than a single device with address 0. You can't do this as long as another device gets initialized. Therefor I thought disabling/enabling the port would be better, but I'm wrong as the result is be the same. > For my device driver I have made a small change to the USB Stack and I have > introduced the return code "USB_ATTACH_NEED_RESET" for drivers to tell the > USB Stack thee device needs to be re-enumerated. The stack then automatically > re-assigns the device it's address, and re-probes for drivers. This way even > two seperate drivers could be made : one with the firmware and one with the > real driver. > Is anyone interrested in a patch maybe? Sounds interesting. -- B.Walter BWCT http://www.bwct.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
