Re: "usbhid-ups" programing problem...

[Frank Pagliughi <fpagliughi@mindspring.com>]

>   
>> For that matter, the usb subsystem could use a bit of an upgrade to make  
>> drivers easier to write.
>>     
>
> Others have said that as well. But it needs somebody to actually do
> it. A lot depends on the complexity of the driver. I recently wrote a
> simple driver and a Linux kernel counterpart without too much effort.
>
>  
Yes, when the USBS framework was specified (ten years ago?) most USB 
chips were ugly beasts, with predefined endpoints, lots of limitations, 
and lots of bugs.

Most of the recent chips that I've seen appear to have a control 
endpoint and some number of fairly generic endpoints. Combining the 
usbs_rx_endpoint and usbs_tx_endpoint into a single thing 
(usbs_endpoint), adding an endpoint number and direction, and things 
like that would be helpful. I could make a list.

Many of the ideas could break the existing USBS drivers. Would this be OK?


But, if we wanted to get fancy, most of the events that a USBS driver 
respond to are the same:
- Respond to a bus reset
- Set the address
- Read an RX endpoint
- Fill a TX endpoint.
...

A common code base for USB drivers might be really helpful.   I could do 
this work, but would it be accepted?

Frank