You are correct but that was not the problem I was addressing. It was addressing the number our software used to address the correct port where URI is plunged in is a different format. Not that it is inferior.
Kinda the same issue with a Pi4. Perhaps see how those folks get by with more than one URI on USB3.
I don’t think they do.
As I see it, (perhaps incorrectly?) the address lines reported by lsusb are not the same.
I don’t see a fix for it till someone writes/adjusts the software.
Traditionally and what the software is expecting is a simple line like 2-3.1 or 1-2.1
1st# being the usb header and the 2nd# being the device on that header.
usb3 will show all headers as 1-1.x
Guessing that all are handled by one interrupt and handler for that interrupt. Could be wrong about that as well. It is a guess. I don’t spend any time on it. I use usb 2 or 1.1.
I would not want to guess if you can run a VM in or over our system.
I never tried it. No reason.I have plenty of old machines to do lessor tasks.
Just try to use the most power for the least consumption.
I certainly don’t want a repeater to go down because I am having issues with windows.
But I realize most systems anymore are personal stations.
It’s just a matter of having enough resources when needed. CPU,MEM,net bandwidth and the overhead in managing it. I have never had any ‘long term success’ trying to do such things.
Just complicates things when there is an issue to track down.
I am sure someone out there will chime in on the subject of VM’s.