On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 10:41:33PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 10:40:10AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote: > > > > No. I'm dealing with new devices being actively developed, with new ones > > coming out every year, so a quirk list would just be never ending > > maintenance pain point. > > Sounds like you have a lot of devices behaving this way. So can't you quirk them > based on VID and CLASS? What I mean by active development is that the timeout continues to be a moving target. A quirk only gives me a fixed value, but I need a modifiable one without having to recompile the kernel.
