https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22642
--- Comment #16 from Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu> 2011-02-20 22:15:32 --- It was 1-4 that took 5 seconds, not usb1 or 0000:00:1d.7 (either of which might reasonably be called ehci_hcd). What is the 1-4 device, anyway? Dan's timing calculations in comment #13 aren't right. The ATA and USB resumes ran in parallel, taking 5 seconds overall. As for why the USB resume took so long, I can't tell from this log. Enabling CONFIG_USB_DEBUG might help. By the way, the real bottleneck is the PNP0C0A:00 device, whatever that is: [ 9294.000258] call PNP0C0A:00+ returned 0 after 9187140 usecs -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb _______________________________________________ acpi-bugzilla mailing list acpi-bugzilla@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acpi-bugzilla
