Both are specifications for USB Host controllers. The difference between
them is internals of the chip and the interface exposed on the PCI bus.
In brief:
OHCI is made by M$ and emphasizes the fact that hardware should
be smart to facilitate the software's task.
UHCI is
On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Bill Paul wrote:
> I also noticed that performance with the OHCI controller is significantly
> better than with the UHCI controller. Just my rotten luck I'm stuck
> with a UHCI one in my laptop.
Ok, with all this flurry of USB development, I keep seeing UHCI and
OHCI. What'
Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, Eric J. Haug
had to walk into mine and say:
>
> > - Find the kue_do_request() function.
> > - Change the timeout from 50 to 100, i.e. change this:
> >
> > usbd_setup_default_xfer(xfer, dev, 0, 100, req,
> >
> Subject: Re: USB D-Link DSB-650 kue0: failed to load code
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric J. Haug)
> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 15:48:42 -0500 (EST)
> X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG
>
> >
> > I have a Toshiba 2100CDS laptop with an OHCI USB controller
> > that gives a
Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, Eric J. Haug
had to walk into mine and say:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a Toshiba 2100CDS laptop with an OHCI USB controller
> that gives a kue0: failed to load code segment error message
> Rather than clutter the list, the conf file and the dme
Hi all,
I have a Toshiba 2100CDS laptop with an OHCI USB controller
that gives a kue0: failed to load code segment error message
Rather than clutter the list, the conf file and the dmesg boot
file is available at
ftp.eas.slu.edu:/pub/incoming/[usbdmesg, usbbootmsg, usbltaconf]
The usbbootmsg is f
