Objective Development Forums 2014-03-02T16:48:10+02:00 https://forums.obdev.at/app.php/feed/topic/8878 2014-03-02T16:48:10+02:00 2014-03-02T16:48:10+02:00 https://forums.obdev.at/viewtopic.php?t=8878&p=26658#p26658 <![CDATA[Re: Interrupt free / polled V-USB]]>

Although I am not familiar with your problem, the reason could indeed be similar. I have also observed that things depend on the operating system and usb hub as well.

You can easily emulate the behavior of the interrupt-free V-USB and avoid the NACKing problem by disabling interrupts while calling usbpoll() and waiting for a free bus before enabling them.

Statistics: Posted by cpldcpu — Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:48 pm

]]> 2014-03-02T16:44:37+02:00 2014-03-02T16:44:37+02:00 https://forums.obdev.at/viewtopic.php?t=8878&p=26657#p26657 <![CDATA[Re: Interrupt free / polled V-USB]]>
The host appetite described in the blog could also probably explains problems I’ve got with CDC-ACM …
( see viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8838 )
I will probably plug a Saleae logic analyser to confirm that)

Statistics: Posted by martinay — Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:44 pm

]]> 2014-03-02T14:32:06+02:00 2014-03-02T14:32:06+02:00 https://forums.obdev.at/viewtopic.php?t=8878&p=26656#p26656 <![CDATA[Interrupt free / polled V-USB]]>
http://cpldcpu.wordpress.com/2014/03/02 ... ree-v-usb/

I think it is pretty interesting, since the approach of intentionally timing out packets also allows to improve the general performance of V-USB, even when interrupts are used. Any thoughts on that?

Statistics: Posted by cpldcpu — Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:32 pm

]]>