On Wed, 11 Jun 2025, Keith Busch wrote: > 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. Hi, Doesn't DRS/FRS address this such way that the device can tell when it's ready? So perhaps check if DRS/FRS is supported and only then make the timeout like really large? -- i.
