On Thursday 05 August 2004 10:05, Michael Guterl wrote: > Thanks for the reply David, but where exactly does this leave me and > the others experiencing this problem? Is there any more information I > can provide that might help? Any possible solutions, patches, etc?
It leaves you (and others) with the problem partially isolated, so that someone with time to track it down will have that much less work to do. The most effective solutions involve someone who has the problem actually stepping up and debugging the whole thing, then providing a patch fixing the problem. A second-best would be collaboration between someone who has the time (not me!) and someone who has the problem (you?) to remotely debug the problem. A third-best would be for someone (you?) to find out exactly which patch caused the problem -- a binary search of the USB patches, luckily it's made easier by the fact that it could only be a change in HID, usbcore, or some HCD. (And most likely IMO it's usbcore.) Then that patch can either be further debugged, or reverted. - Dave > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 08:34:27 -0700, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > .... > > > > The dmesg output shows this is a HID failure. It's likely connected > > with some changes in the unlink logic, since that's what returns > > the "-ENOENT" status. The usb_kill_urb() changes added a new > > URB state as I recall, maybe that's part of the issue here... since > > that routine replaced the previous "synchronous unlink" logic. > > > > - Dave > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now, one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
