Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761314AbXK2IFT (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:05:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755998AbXK2IFE (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:05:04 -0500 Received: from smtp-out001.kontent.com ([81.88.40.215]:35853 "EHLO smtp-out001.kontent.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755501AbXK2IFB (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:05:01 -0500 From: Oliver Neukum Organization: Novell To: Pete Zaitcev Subject: Re: Add the infamous Huawei E220 to option.c Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:04:28 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 20070904.708012) Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, preining@logic.at, kristoffer.ericson@gmail.com, drussell@redhat.com, johann.wilhelm@student.tugraz.at, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20071128161305.b01167b3.zaitcev@redhat.com> <200711290839.00625.oliver@neukum.org> <20071128235237.152753e0.zaitcev@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20071128235237.152753e0.zaitcev@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200711290904.29761.oliver@neukum.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1386 Lines: 32 Am Donnerstag, 29. November 2007 08:52:37 schrieb Pete Zaitcev: > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:38:59 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 29. November 2007 01:13:05 schrieb Pete Zaitcev: > > > The problem stems from the fact that both option and usb-storage can > > > bind to the modem when in storage mode: the former binds because of the > > > storage class, the latter binds because of VID/PID match. The modprobe > > > loads both, > > > > Isn't it possible to fix this in option's module table? > > At first thought it'll need adding a field to struct usb_serial to save > the driver_info from the ID table in usb_serial_probe. It's something I'd Why? It is passed to the subdrivers in their probe(). Maybe it should simply be passed in attach(), too? > like to discuss actually. I hate fields which store information this > way: filled in one place, used in another place... From the perspective > of code prettiness I would rather add another method for usb_serial_probe > to call. But I'm not sure really. Does the device remain a storage class device after the crucial control message? Regards Oliver - 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/