Re: fpusb vs. usbfs2

[Daniel Drake <dsd@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Sarah Sharp wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> Have you looked at usbfs2?  It sounds like usbfs2 and fpusb have some similar
> goals, although I admit I only glanced briefly at your wiki.
> 
> http://wiki.cs.pdx.edu/usb/usbfs2.html

We already spoke briefly in private email. I haven't looked at the code yet.

I may be wrong, but I feel that a userspace library to access usbfs2 
will still be useful, to simplify certain concepts and reduce duplication.

Also, I'm hoping that my library will provide portability to other O/S's 
in the future, like has been done with libusb. It will also act as a way 
of hiding the differences between usbfs and usbfs2 from the application 
developer, by providing the same API to do the same thing over both.

One of my personal goals is to provide a fd-oriented async interface to 
applications, so that those applications can learn when the library has 
something to do (i.e. iteration function needs to be called) by polling 
some file descriptors. This is possible with usbfs as you can select() 
on the existing nodes for URB completion. I'm not sure how this fits 
into the usbfs2 scheme of things as I haven't yet read up on the AIO 
stuff you pointed me to.

I do like the design goals of usbfs2 and do plan to use it within fpusb 
when it comes available - and presumably it is possible to get pollable 
file descriptors which describe AIO completion.

Thanks,
Daniel

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
linux-usb-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel