Hi. This is the qmail-send program at rs152.securehostserver.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
vcheckquota: Message would exceed virtual user's disk quota.
/vdel
All,
I'm using an external USB 2.0 Drive with a GeneSys Chipset. What do I
have to do to get it working reliably? Until now I've changed
".max_sectors" to 64 and I've applied the following two patches:
http://lkml.org/lkml/diff/2004/2/8/42/1
http://lkml.org/lkml/diff/2004/2/8/42/2
Is there any
This patch makes the usbcore PCI suspend/resume logic behave
much better. In particular:
- Even HCs without PCI PM support will normally be able
to support global suspend, saving power ... and will
need to resume later. Let them try to suspend; lots
of not-that-old USB controllers don't
On Thu, 06 May 2004 09:27:12 +0100, "Ian Campbell"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 08:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I thought, skimming the specs from Philips, that the ISP 116x is OHCI,
> > but does'nt have memory-mapped registers (it's PIO).
>
> I seem to remember that it i
On Thu, 06 May 2004 09:27:12 +0100, "Ian Campbell"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 08:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I thought, skimming the specs from Philips, that the ISP 116x is OHCI,
> > but does'nt have memory-mapped registers (it's PIO).
>
> I seem to remember that it i
> Hmm, as we're currently thinking about replacing the dreaded SL811
> for our next PXA263 design with an ISP 116x, that's bad news for me ;)
>
> I thought, skimming the specs from Philips, that the ISP 116x is OHCI,
> but does'nt have memory-mapped registers (it's PIO).
Well, the registers are m
Microsoft Windows XP Professiornal 2002
Retail price: $270.99 Our low Pricme: $50.00 You Save: $220.00
Adobe Photoshiop 7.0
Retail price: $609.99 Our low Price: $60.00 You Savpe: $550.00
Microsoft Office XP Professional 2002
Retail price: $579.99 Our low Price: $60.00 You Savre: $510.0
After a restless night, I've come up with some interesting ideas...
First, let's acknowledge that in 2.6 we must require drivers not to
interact with a device after their disconnect() has returned. Also, let's
acknowledge that in the absence of significant changes to the SCSI core,
if usb-stor
David Brownell wrote:
>
> Wouldn't a plain old atomic "BUSY" bitflag work better? If it's set,
> usbcore would reject urbs with -EAGAIN ... from all contexts,
> including the many that can't acquire semaphores!
>
Going back a bit--what context were you thinking of that wouldn't be
able to gra
Alan Stern replied:
>>
>> >If it works initially, before you unplug the device, then interrupts
are
>> >enabled.
>>
>> But...
>> I put in a printk() at the start of the interrupt handler: uhci_irq()
>> and it _never_ gets called!... ever!
>
>Well, that's bad. Didn't you say before that when th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But wouldn't a bit flag require continuous retries on the part of
whomever gets the -EAGAIN when they try to submit an URB? And, if so,
wouldn't that leave open the possibility of them missing the window
when the BUSY bit isn't set (unless they retry in a very tight loop,
The original message was received at Thu, 6 May 2004 19:30:02 +0200
from [209.194.189.10]
- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(reason: 550 5.1.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... User unknown)
- Transcript of session follows -
... while talkin
+/*
+ * This should be a separate module.
+ */
int usb_hub_init(void)
What do you mean by this?
I wondered about that too... I didn't write it, so probably David did. I
just left it in there when I submitted the patch. If you would prefer to
take it out, that's fine with me.
It's there in L
On Thu, 6 May 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Alan Stern replied:
>
> >If it works initially, before you unplug the device, then interrupts are
> >enabled.
>
> But...
> I put in a printk() at the start of the interrupt handler: uhci_irq()
> and it _never_ gets called!... ever!
Well, that's bad.
Alan Stern replied:
>On Wed, 5 May 2004, Fulko Hew wrote:
>
>> Well your right. Both coldplug and hotplug does not get me to uhci_irq
(),
>> but then again neither does the unplug. ;-|
>> The unplug does get to core/usb.c:usb_disconnect()
>>
>> Whats the best way to figure out if interrupts are
On Thu, 6 May 2004 11:42:50 -0400 (EDT) Alan Stern wrote:
| On Wed, 5 May 2004, Greg KH wrote:
|
| > Looks good, applied, thanks.
| >
| > One comment:
| >
| > > +/*
| > > + * This should be a separate module.
| > > + */
| > > int usb_hub_init(void)
| >
| > What do you mean by this?
|
| I won
On Wed, 5 May 2004, Fulko Hew wrote:
> Well your right. Both coldplug and hotplug does not get me to uhci_irq(),
> but then again neither does the unplug. ;-|
> The unplug does get to core/usb.c:usb_disconnect()
>
> Whats the best way to figure out if interrupts are even enabled on the
> device
On Wed, 5 May 2004, Greg KH wrote:
> Looks good, applied, thanks.
>
> One comment:
>
> > +/*
> > + * This should be a separate module.
> > + */
> > int usb_hub_init(void)
>
> What do you mean by this?
I wondered about that too... I didn't write it, so probably David did. I
just left it in
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:24:45 +1000
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch fixes some incorrect returns using copy_to_user.
> It is for 2.4.26 + the previous patch.
It's on the board, Herbert. Might even be in a Marcelo's -rc already.
Don't worry, I'm tracking this.
-- Pete
-
David Brownell wrote:
>>> Wouldn't a plain old atomic "BUSY" bitflag work better? If it's
>>> set, usbcore would reject urbs with -EAGAIN ... from all
>>> contexts, including the many that can't acquire semaphores!
>>
>>
>> I thought (and I might be confused with other OSes here) that there
>> w
This patch fixes some incorrect returns using copy_to_user.
It is for 2.4.26 + the previous patch.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbe
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 08:15:15PM +1000, herbert wrote:
>
> The current code is applying the maxusage limit to GUSAGE/SUSAGE. This
> is incorrect as the number of values is stored in field->report_count,
> not field->maxusage. The USB phone from www.virbiage.com is one device
> where report_cou
Hi:
The current code is applying the maxusage limit to GUSAGE/SUSAGE. This
is incorrect as the number of values is stored in field->report_count,
not field->maxusage. The USB phone from www.virbiage.com is one device
where report_count exceeds maxusage.
The following patch corrects the check fo
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 08:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I thought, skimming the specs from Philips, that the ISP 116x is OHCI,
> but does'nt have memory-mapped registers (it's PIO).
I seem to remember that it is pretty OHCI like, but with a few quirks.
Unfortunately it was some time ago when I loo
On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 08:34:41AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Hasjim Williams wrote:
>
> >The Viper Embedded Linux Developer Kit is based around an XScale
> >device, so it needs to use an Embedded USB Host Controller. The
> >Philips ISP1161A1 is such an example. An Embedded USB Host controll
Hi,
thanks for your great efforts to get external devices with genesys chipset
working with ehci!
Since Kernel 2.6.4 the device hangs when burning CDs with cdrecord or cdrdao
during sending the cue-sheet. The only case where this does not happen is
when using tao mode for data CDs.
Might this
26 matches
Mail list logo
