Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262356AbVAZQjN (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:39:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262409AbVAZQjM (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:39:12 -0500 Received: from ns9.hostinglmi.net ([213.194.149.146]:30886 "EHLO ns9.hostinglmi.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262356AbVAZQhz (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:37:55 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:38:11 +0100 From: DervishD To: Oliver Neukum Cc: Linux-kernel , linux-usb-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: USB API, ioctl's and libusb Message-ID: <20050126163811.GA259@DervishD> Mail-Followup-To: Oliver Neukum , Linux-kernel , linux-usb-users@lists.sourceforge.net References: <20050126122014.GF58@DervishD> <200501261440.38766.oliver@neukum.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200501261440.38766.oliver@neukum.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Organization: DervishD X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns9.hostinglmi.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - dervishd.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1658 Lines: 38 Hi Oliver :) * Oliver Neukum dixit: > Am Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2005 13:20 schrieb DervishD: > > ? ? My question is: which interface should be used by user space > > applications, or ioctl's? Is the ioctl interface > > deprecated in any way? In the "Programming guide for Linux USB Device > > Drivers", located in http://usb.in.tum.de/usbdoc/, I can't find ioctl > > interface references :? > You are supposed to use libusb. That's irrelevant, the program I was trying to fix uses libusb. My question is about the preferred kernel interface, 'cause I don't know if it's the ioctl one or the URB one (well, I'm calling 'URB' interface the API that is implemented using URB's inside the kernel). BTW, and judging from the program I've read, there are lots of operations that must be done using 'usb_control_msg', and libusb implements that function with exactly the same interface as the kernel. The only difference is that libusb uses ioctl and the kernel implements the function using URB's. IMHO libusb doesn't provide a cleaner API, the only advantage of libusb is portability. Anyway, I've not used it enough to judge, I'm more concerned about kernel USB interface, not libusb one. Thanks anyway :) Ra?l N??ez de Arenas Coronado -- Linux Registered User 88736 http://www.dervishd.net & http://www.pleyades.net/ It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/