Slow/Failed Enumeration on Windows 11 and Linux pc when bcdUSB = 0x0200 vs 0x0110 while using MSC dual lun example #3719
Replies: 3 comments 3 replies
|
Hi @HiFiPhile, Thank you for helping. I am currently using tinyusb version 0.18.0 Please find that attached files that I am using in this example. The value of BCD here I have updated to 0x110 if I change this to 0x200 then enumeration takes so much time 20-30 seconds and most of the time it fails. Please let me know if you see any concern in the implementation. main.c Tusb config .h file content: /*
*/ #ifndef TUSB_CONFIG_H #ifdef __cplusplus //--------------------------------------------------------------------+ // RHPort number used for device can be defined by board.mk, default to port 0 // RHPort max operational speed can defined by board.mk //-------------------------------------------------------------------- // defined by board.mk #ifndef CFG_TUSB_OS #ifndef CFG_TUSB_DEBUG // Enable Device stack // Default is max speed that hardware controller could support with on-chip PHY /* USB DMA on some MCUs can only access a specific SRAM region with restriction on alignment.
#ifndef CFG_TUSB_MEM_ALIGN //-------------------------------------------------------------------- #ifndef CFG_TUD_ENDPOINT0_SIZE // CDC FIFO size of TX and RX #ifdef __cplusplus #endif /* TUSB_CONFIG_H */ |
|
Are you still working on musb ? There are quite changes merged, you will have more chance with latest master. |

Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Hi, I am using the TinyUSB MSC Dual-LUN example on a Full-Speed USB device. I have observed an unusual enumeration behavior on Windows 11 and Linux pc.
The only change between the two test cases is the bcdUSB value in the Device Descriptor:
Case 1:
.bcdUSB = 0x0110
Case 2:
.bcdUSB = 0x0200
Additional information:
My understanding is that a Full-Speed USB 2.0 device should still be able to advertise bcdUSB = 0x0200.
Are there any known issues or additional descriptor requirements when using bcdUSB = 0x0200 in TinyUSB?
Could Windows be sending additional requests (such as Device Qualifier or other USB 2.0-specific requests) that need to be handled differently compared to bcdUSB = 0x0110?
All reactions