On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > The endpoint naming convention currently determines type and direction. > > It works okay for simple cases but not for more complicated ones. For > > example, it can't handle endpoints that support bulk or interrupt but > > not isochronous. If you really want to make this general, the way to > > do it is to have separate bitflags for: control, bulk-in, bulk-out, ... > > not bulk-in/bulk-out. I was thinking of having transfer and direction > completely separated. Or would there be cases where endpoint support > bulk in/out but isoc in-only ? > > I don't think so...
Yeah, you're probably right. But you still need flags for the two directions. I'm pretty sure there are endpoints that are in-only or out-only. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
