Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 09:11:06 +0200 (MET DST) From: Nick Hibma <nick.hibma@jrc.it> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: Andrew Reilly <A.Reilly@lake.com.au>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Limit of bus hierarchies (was Re: PCI modems do not work???) Message-ID: <Pine.GS4.4.10.9909060907450.5512-100000@elect8> In-Reply-To: <199909060541.XAA03034@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> No. The Windows world presents a standard SERIAL DRIVER interface, at > least that's the theory that is preached. I see no reason why a USB > serial port wouldn't do the same. USB defines a serial port > interface, IIRC, which is the same across manufacturers (in theory) > which would be handled by a single USB driver in our USB stack. Keep dreaming ... Example: Mice and keyboards have a well defined standard interface: HID (Human Interface Devices), but we have found already three ways of doing things, requiring a rewrite of the probe and attach functionality. Reason: It's much cheaper to present one device with a special interface and write the driver (for Windows) for it, than to present two functions and having to integrate a hub on the device. You don't want to know what a ethernet/parallel/serial/hub thingie looks like. I don't have one, so anyone that has one, could you send me the output of the usb_dump utility avaible from http://www.etla.net/~n_hibma/usb/usb.pl > Likewise with parallel ports. Although turning a USB parallel port > into a bit twiddling interface may present some interesting > challanges. There is at least a spec for the parallel port devices. -- ISIS/STA, T.P.270, Joint Research Centre, 21020 Ispra, Italy To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GS4.4.10.9909060907450.5512-100000>