On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 11:08 PM Jiri Kosina wrote:
>
> On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
>
> > > Which should fix this. It is quite simple and safe, so if we get testing
> > > feedback relatively soon, we could go with the fix instead of dropping the
> > > product-id, your call.
> >
>
On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> > Which should fix this. It is quite simple and safe, so if we get testing
> > feedback relatively soon, we could go with the fix instead of dropping the
> > product-id, your call.
>
> I should receive the M280 tomorrow, hopefully with the C52F. If
Hi,
On 04-06-19 14:25, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 12:50 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 04-06-19 12:08, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 9:51 AM Benjamin Tissoires
wrote:
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:17 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 03-06-19 15:55,
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 12:50 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 04-06-19 12:08, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 9:51 AM Benjamin Tissoires
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:17 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On 03-06-19 15:55, Benjamin
Hi,
On 04-06-19 12:08, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 9:51 AM Benjamin Tissoires
wrote:
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:17 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 03-06-19 15:55, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:51 AM Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi Again,
On 03-06-19
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 9:51 AM Benjamin Tissoires
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:17 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 03-06-19 15:55, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:51 AM Hans de Goede wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Again,
> > >>
> > >> On 03-06-19 11:11,
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 10:36 AM Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 04-06-19 10:05, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>
>
> We should likely just remove c52f from the list of supported devices.
> C52f receivers seem to have a different firmware as they are meant to
> work with different
Hi,
On 04-06-19 10:05, Hans de Goede wrote:
We should likely just remove c52f from the list of supported devices.
C52f receivers seem to have a different firmware as they are meant to
work with different devices than C534. So I guess it is safer to not
handle those right now and get the code
Hi,
On 04-06-19 09:51, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:17 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 03-06-19 15:55, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:51 AM Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi Again,
On 03-06-19 11:11, Hans de Goede wrote:
not sure about the rest of
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:17 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 03-06-19 15:55, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:51 AM Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Again,
> >>
> >> On 03-06-19 11:11, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>
> >>
> not sure about the rest of logitech issues
Hi,
On 03-06-19 15:55, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:51 AM Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi Again,
On 03-06-19 11:11, Hans de Goede wrote:
not sure about the rest of logitech issues yet) next week.
The main problem seems to be the request_module patches. Although I also
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:51 AM Hans de Goede wrote:
>
> Hi Again,
>
> On 03-06-19 11:11, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>
> >> not sure about the rest of logitech issues yet) next week.
> >
> > The main problem seems to be the request_module patches. Although I also
Can't we use
Hi Again,
On 03-06-19 11:11, Hans de Goede wrote:
not sure about the rest of logitech issues yet) next week.
The main problem seems to be the request_module patches. Although I also
have 2 reports of problems with hid-logitech-dj driving the 0xc52f product-id,
so we may need to drop that
Hi,
On 03-06-19 11:11, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 01-06-19 00:15, Jiri Kosina wrote:
On Thu, 30 May 2019, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 5/29/19 2:17 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
...
Dave, can you try building your initrd without the hid-logitech-dj module
included in the initrd?
I did this on a
Hi,
On 01-06-19 00:15, Jiri Kosina wrote:
On Thu, 30 May 2019, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 5/29/19 2:17 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
...
Dave, can you try building your initrd without the hid-logitech-dj module
included in the initrd?
I did this on a vanilla 5.2-rc2 kernel (without the reverts) and
On Thu, 30 May 2019, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 5/29/19 2:17 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> ...
> > Dave, can you try building your initrd without the hid-logitech-dj module
> > included in the initrd?
>
> I did this on a vanilla 5.2-rc2 kernel (without the reverts) and still
> experienced the boot
On 5/29/19 2:17 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
...
> Dave, can you try building your initrd without the hid-logitech-dj module
> included in the initrd?
I did this on a vanilla 5.2-rc2 kernel (without the reverts) and still
experienced the boot hang while the device was inserted.
> Also can you check
Hi,
On 5/28/19 8:11 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 5/28/19 10:45 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 7:15 PM Jiri Kosina wrote:
Just to confirm -- I guess reverting 4ceabaf79 and a025a18fe would work
this around, right?
Yes, reverting that pair on top of 5.2-rc1 works around
On 5/28/19 10:45 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 7:15 PM Jiri Kosina wrote:
>> Just to confirm -- I guess reverting 4ceabaf79 and a025a18fe would work
>> this around, right?
Yes, reverting that pair on top of 5.2-rc1 works around the issue.
> It would be also interesting
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 7:15 PM Jiri Kosina wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 May 2019, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> > I have a system that works fine on 5.1. When updating to 5.2-rc1, it
> > hangs at boot waiting on an instance of systemd-udevd. The kernel
> > backtrace
On Tue, 28 May 2019, Dave Hansen wrote:
> I have a system that works fine on 5.1. When updating to 5.2-rc1, it
> hangs at boot waiting on an instance of systemd-udevd. The kernel
> backtrace (https://photos.app.goo.gl/EV8rf7FofWouvdeE8) looks like it's
> doing an finit_module() that dives into
I have a system that works fine on 5.1. When updating to 5.2-rc1, it
hangs at boot waiting on an instance of systemd-udevd. The kernel
backtrace (https://photos.app.goo.gl/EV8rf7FofWouvdeE8) looks like it's
doing an finit_module() that dives into the hid code and is waiting on a
22 matches
Mail list logo
