USB Device Support

[Tom Spear]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <damjan.jov at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Tom Spear <speeddymon at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Attached is the lsusb -v output, trimmed to only include the pedometer's
> > info. I have many USB devices, so I didn't want to leave you to sort
> through
> > a bunch of useless info.
> >
> > I don't have the webcam with me at the moment, but I will see if I can
> find
> > it when I am at home soon.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <damjan.jov at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Please send the output of "lsusb -v" first so I can see if it's useful.
> >>
> >> Thank you for the offer
> >> Damjan
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Tom Spear <speeddymon at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Now that I think about it, I have a webcam which the last supported
> >> > windows
> >> > version was XP. I'm not using it for anything since I have another one
> >> > which
> >> > is supported in 7 and linux, but I don't know if it's picked up in
> linux
> >> > either. I could send it your way too tho.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >> > Tom
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Tom Spear <speeddymon at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I have a USB pedometer that uploads the data to the internet. I could
> >> >> get
> >> >> another one and the driver software for you to play with. You have to
> >> >> be a
> >> >> registered member for a monthly fee to get one otherwise, but my job
> >> >> sponsors anyone that wants to get/stay in shape that works for them,
> so
> >> >> getting an extra pedometer is fine by me. I have been hoping for an
> >> >> opportunity to mention that it doesn't work, and this seems like as
> >> >> good as
> >> >> any. :-)
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks
> >> >>
> >> >> Tom
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Damjan Jovanovic
> >> >> <damjan.jov at gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:39 AM, Eric Durbin <eadurbin at gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Damjan Jovanovic
> >> >>> > <damjan.jov at gmail.com>
> >> >>> > wrote:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> When last I heard from Alexander Morozov (October 2009), he
> wasn't
> >> >>> >> working on those patches much, and had no interest in sending
> them
> >> >>> >> to
> >> >>> >> wine-patches.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> I did some work on USB since then, and sent some patches starting
> >> >>> >> from
> >> >>> >> around March 2010 (too many attempts to list, search for them).
> >> >>> >> Most
> >> >>> >> were rejected.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> The USB story goes as follows:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> My libusb patch was rejected IIRC because the libusb situation
> was
> >> >>> >> unclear. There's the old libusb-0.1 and the new more powerful
> >> >>> >> libusb-1.0. IIRC each *nix hacked up its own specific variation
> of
> >> >>> >> libusb that had to be detected specifically, and some *nixes
> didn't
> >> >>> >> support the libusb-1.0 interface yet (libusb-1.0 itself only
> >> >>> >> supports
> >> >>> >> Linux and MacOS when last I checked, and they were doing a
> Windows
> >> >>> >> port).
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> The ntoskrnl that Wine currently emulates is total bogus: one
> >> >>> >> process
> >> >>> >> per driver, drivers all in separate processes from each other. On
> >> >>> >> Windows there's a single address space for all drivers and they
> can
> >> >>> >> communicate amongst themselves. I don't think inter-driver
> >> >>> >> communication is that crucial initially, but it will be
> eventually
> >> >>> >> (eg. last I heard, the iPod driver stacks on top of USBSTOR.SYS,
> >> >>> >> and
> >> >>> >> multi-function USB devices can use a different driver for each
> >> >>> >> interface - these may communicate among themselves with private
> >> >>> >> ioctl
> >> >>> >> requests). The big problem with the multi process situation is
> >> >>> >> hardware sharing: how do you set it up so each driver accesses
> its
> >> >>> >> own
> >> >>> >> and only its own hardware?
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Drivers either start on system startup (Wine starts those with
> the
> >> >>> >> first process that starts), or get loaded on-demand as the
> hardware
> >> >>> >> is
> >> >>> >> plugged in. Most drivers should install themselves to be loaded
> >> >>> >> on-demand. Who loads those and how?
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Windows uses USBHUB.SYS to do device I/O and load drivers on
> >> >>> >> demand.
> >> >>> >> Alexandre didn't want that dll because it exports nothing (all
> its
> >> >>> >> features are accessible via internal ioctls), and suggested
> adding
> >> >>> >> the
> >> >>> >> features to USBD.SYS instead, which we already have and which has
> >> >>> >> exports. Now USBD.SYS is linked to by most (but not all) USB
> >> >>> >> drivers
> >> >>> >> so (most of the time) it automatically gets loaded into each one
> -
> >> >>> >> great right? - but it has no idea which driver it got loaded
> with,
> >> >>> >> nor
> >> >>> >> a straightforward way to determine which device(s!) that driver
> >> >>> >> wants
> >> >>> >> to drive. Also, since most drivers only load on-demand, the
> driver
> >> >>> >> will never load, and thus this won't work unless we load those
> >> >>> >> drivers
> >> >>> >> on startup instead. The other approach, which I tried, was to get
> >> >>> >> Wine's mountmgr.sys to detect USB devices using HAL, then pass
> them
> >> >>> >> to
> >> >>> >> a loaded-on-startup instance of USBHUB.SYS using a Wine-private
> >> >>> >> ioctl,
> >> >>> >> which would detect the driver for the device and launch a new
> >> >>> >> instance
> >> >>> >> of itself that would make a device object and load the driver to
> >> >>> >> attach to it. This was all a bit a hack (USBHUB.SYS uses
> >> >>> >> environment
> >> >>> >> variables to tell the child which device and driver to run) and
> >> >>> >> Alexandre also didn't the the Wine-private ioctls. Alexander
> >> >>> >> Morozov's
> >> >>> >> patch did things the Windows way: all drivers in one ntoskrnl
> >> >>> >> process
> >> >>> >> - this won't work properly in Wine for years, if ever, since
> >> >>> >> ntoskrnl
> >> >>> >> is so incomplete and one bad driver will crash them all. Another
> >> >>> >> possibility could be to keep drivers in separate processes, but
> >> >>> >> allow
> >> >>> >> inter-process communication, but I see serializing IRPs between
> >> >>> >> processes as being complex and very slow.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Driver installation is also quite a mission. Windows detects that
> >> >>> >> the
> >> >>> >> hardware doesn't have a driver installed, and then generates the
> >> >>> >> device ID and compatible IDs and searches .INF files for one that
> >> >>> >> can
> >> >>> >> support it. Our setupapi needs to be substantially improved to be
> >> >>> >> able
> >> >>> >> to do the same, and some newdev.dll and manual INF parsing work
> to
> >> >>> >> install the driver may also be necessary, and I can already think
> >> >>> >> of
> >> >>> >> cases where even class installers will be necessary too :-(.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Wine only sends DeviceIoControl to drivers. For anything
> >> >>> >> non-trivial,
> >> >>> >> other file-related user-space functions (at least ReadFile,
> >> >>> >> WriteFile)
> >> >>> >> need to go to the driver too. The infrastructure for this does
> not
> >> >>> >> even exist yet, and would probably affects wineserver as well.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Regression tests for ntosnkrl.exe and kernel drivers don't exist,
> >> >>> >> and
> >> >>> >> are difficult to come up with, since we'd have to compile and
> load
> >> >>> >> drivers on Windows and run tests that don't crash Windows :-).
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> So the architecture for USB support is tricky to say the least.
> But
> >> >>> >> I'd still like to resume work on my USB patches some time soon,
> >> >>> >> would
> >> >>> >> you like to help?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I'd be willing to help if you want some assistance. I don't know
> >> >>> > much
> >> >>> > about
> >> >>> > the subject yet, but I'm reading  programming the wdm atm.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Firstly I'd like to find a cheap simple USB device that we can
> >> >>> actually get working quickly. Earlier I was experimenting with my
> >> >>> Blackberry driver, but that's not going far quickly, since it's a
> >> >>> multi-protocol device (modem, mass storage, and proprietary
> protocols,
> >> >>> etc.). I've got a USB scanner that's unsupported by SANE, but that
> >> >>> needs ReadFile/WriteFile which is a lot of work by itself. Same with
> >> >>> USB flash sticks. I can get hold of an iPod but that's probably the
> >> >>> most complex, needing to stack on top of USBSTOR.SYS IIRC.
> Ironically
> >> >>> drivers for the easy hardware (USB mice) are unnecessary anyway,
> since
> >> >>> the Linux drivers are good enough, and the Windows drivers probably
> >> >>> need to be driven from user-space by bits Wine doesn't have. Maybe I
> >> >>> should give up and just get something partially working, add the
> rest
> >> >>> later gradually. Any ideas?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Then it's largely a matter of design. I think Alexandre's idea
> >> >>> (process per driver, host all USB code in USBD.SYS) is good enough
> >> >>> initially.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Essentially the first steps would be:
> >> >>> 1. libusb integration
> >> >>> 2. driver loading hacks
> >> >>> 3. driver -> devices lookup
> >> >>> 4. usb bus enumeration for devices
> >> >>> 5. create pdo and fdo for each device
> >> >>> 6. AddDevice to driver
> >> >>> 7. perform I/O for IRPs coming down from the driver using libusb I/O
> >> >>> functions
> >> >>>
> >> >>> That should get a very basic driver (that only uses the control
> pipe)
> >> >>> working. I'll try to get some of this done later this week/weekend.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Damjan
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>
> It's a human interface device, 1 control pipe and 1 interrupt pipe.
> Looks pretty simple. You could also use "winedump -j import" on the
> driver to see if it has any dependencies.
>
> I'll get working on the basics of USB first. If the device doesn't
> work on your tests after that, SSH access might be quicker and easier
> than intercontinental shipping.
>
> Thank you
> Damjan
>

By driver, do you mean the wine-loaded driver, or whatever kernel module
loads in linux?


Thanks

Tom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20100921/4650e90a/attachment.htm>