* What is the reason of not using the same struct for usbs_rx_endpoint and usbs_tx_endpoint ???
@ 2006-02-01 23:14 oliver munz @ s p e a g
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: oliver munz @ s p e a g @ 2006-02-01 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ecos-devel
Im want my USB-driver to be able to change dynamical his endpoint
configurations... I dont't really understand the difference between the
usbs_rx_endpoint and usbs_tx_endpoint struct's. I want use only one of them,
and fill it with the rx- or tx-functions.
I think the only problem i can get, are the optional static IO-entry for the
USB-endpoints. But maybe its the better idea to make IO-entrys in a
USB-Class like CDC Package...
Is there somebody who can see other problems in using "usbs_rx_endpoint" as
tx-endpoint?
Thanks for any answer
Oliver Munz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2006-02-01 23:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-02-01 23:14 What is the reason of not using the same struct for usbs_rx_endpoint and usbs_tx_endpoint ??? oliver munz @ s p e a g
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).