VIRUS ALERT
Our virus checker found
virus: Win32.Mix
banned filenames: details.scr, .exe
in your email to the following recipient:
-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery of the email was stopped!
Please check your system for viruses,
or ask your system administrator to do so.
For your reference,
Hi David,
should I copy the list, and you two when replying in the future?
David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 05 September 2004 3:32 pm, Robert Urban wrote:
> >
> > by the way: I forget to mention that the drive only works (with
> > kernel 2.6.5) on one of the three USB busses present.
>
> Jus
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 04:05:59PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> Greg:
>
> This patch takes some code that was only used in one place in the hub
> driver, and packages it up into a subroutine which is now called from
> several places. The routine does a logical disconnect -- for example,
> after
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:11:21PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
> Use list_for_each_entry_safe to make code more readable.
> Compile tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Maximilian Attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Applied, thanks.
greg k-h
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:11:15PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
> Make code more readable with list_for_each_entry_safe.
> (Is this a non i386? I can't compile it.)
>
> Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Maximilian Attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Applied, than
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:10:59PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Make code more readable with list_for_each_entry.
> Compile tested.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Patch incremental on previous list_for_each().
> Signed-off-by: Maximilian Attems <[EMAIL PROTE
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:10:48PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Make code more readable with list_for_each_entry.
> Compile tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Patch incremental on the list_for_each() change.
> Signed-off-by: Maximilian Attems <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:11:05PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
> Make code more readable with list_for_each_entry.
> Compile tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Maximilian Attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This needs to go to the USB UHCI driver main
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 04:08:39PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> Greg:
>
> This patch changes a couple of new routines in the suspend/resume code.
> Internally they use port numbers starting from 1, unlike every other
> routine in the hub driver. This changes the port numbers to origin-0, for
>
Hm, you have a tab character in the Subject: did you mean for that?
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:11:10PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
> Use list_for_each_entry to make code more readable.
> Compile tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Maximilian A
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:10:54PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Make code more readable with list_for_each_entry.
> Compile tested.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Patch incremental on previous list_for_each().
> Signed-off-by: Maximilian Attems <[EMAIL PROTE
On Saturday 04 September 2004 7:02 am, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> The following comment is present in hub.c:1175
>
> /* cope with hardware quirkiness:
> * - let SET_ADDRESS settle, some device hardware wants it
> * - read ep0 maxpacket even for high and low speed,
> */
>
> Could anyone tel
On Sunday 05 September 2004 2:57 pm, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Steve Calfee wrote:
>
> > It is kind of hard to understand how windows does bandwidth allocation for
> > control packets for low speed devices, ...
>
> I don't know how Windows does it, but I can tell you what the UHCI
On Tuesday 31 August 2004 1:28 am, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 04:22:47PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > I just came across this message in my old mail folder. A patch was sent
> > in recently that might help with your problem. You can find the patch
> > (for 2.6.8) here:
>
> Looks
On Sunday 05 September 2004 3:32 pm, Robert Urban wrote:
>
> by the way: I forget to mention that the drive only works (with
> kernel 2.6.5) on one of the three USB busses present.
Just three?The EHCI controller reports there are three more
busses in addition to EHCI ... you showed one UHCI,
Hi Alan,
Alan Stern wrote:
> Robert, does the same problem (i.e., "ehci_hcd :00:1d.7: HC died;
> cleaning up" in the system log) still occur with 2.6.9-rc1?
dunno, but will find out :)
by the way: I forget to mention that the drive only works (with
kernel 2.6.5) on one of the three USB bu
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Steve Calfee wrote:
> It is kind of hard to understand how windows does bandwidth allocation for
> control packets for low speed devices, it looks like during enum a low speed
> device gets priority over all ongoing FS bulk transfers.
I don't know how Windows does it, but I
David:
Could you take a look at this? Robert Urban has had trouble with his EHCI
controller for the last several kernel releases. Below are two system
logs, one showing that everything worked okay under 2.6.5 and the other
showing how the controller dies under 2.6.7.
Robert, does the same pr
Am Sonntag, 5. September 2004 12:41 schrieb Ben Castricum:
> Hi Oliver,
>
> > #1 Please change line 50 of cdc-acm.c from "#undef DEBUG" to "#define
> > DEBUG"
> > #2 Recompile kernel or modules
> > #3 Send in a syslog not of a reboot, but of plugging in the device
>
> I did all that, but it does
From: Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Steve Calfee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] USBDEVFS_CONTROL behaviour difference
between 2.4.27 and 2.6.7
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2004 11:13:55 -0400 (EDT)
On Sat, 4 Sep
Am Sonntag, 5. September 2004 12:41 schrieb Ben Castricum:
> Hi Oliver,
>
> > #1 Please change line 50 of cdc-acm.c from "#undef DEBUG" to "#define
> > DEBUG"
> > #2 Recompile kernel or modules
> > #3 Send in a syslog not of a reboot, but of plugging in the device
>
> I did all that, but it does
Hi Alan,
I build a 2.6.5 kernel with debugging turned on. The external drive
(Maxtor OneTouch) worked properly.
On
http://www.unix-wissen.de/usb/
you will find links to the boot-messages and the USB kernel
debugging messages under 2.6.5, along with the old stuff under
2.6.7, when it d
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004, Steve Calfee wrote:
> One thing to keep in mind while looking at these traces is that windows
> cannot respond to any I/O event in a couple of milliseconds. Therefore in
> the initial get device descriptors you see the setup packet, a few frames
> pause where the windows int
Okay, this is kinda replying to a dead thread, but anyway.
On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 01:09, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Andrew Pilley wrote:
>
> > Alrighty.
> >
> > Ran overnight for approximately 6-7 hours, and was working fine this
> > morning.
> >
> > Of course, since it's statistic
Hi Oliver,
#1 Please change line 50 of cdc-acm.c from "#undef DEBUG" to "#define
DEBUG"
#2 Recompile kernel or modules
#3 Send in a syslog not of a reboot, but of plugging in the device
I did all that, but it doesn't show any more info than with a reboot. The 2
lines I get when plugging in the de
Am Freitag, 3. September 2004 18:48 schrieb Ben Castricum:
>
> >> I have attached the output of lsusb -v to the bug report in bugzilla
> >> (hope
> >> that's ok).
> >
> > Please also attach a full syslog (with this line "#undef DEBUG" in
> > cdc-acm.c
> > reversed) of the not working kernel.
>
26 matches
Mail list logo
