On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 05:00:42PM +0200, Georg Acher wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 06:09:52PM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
>
> > Questions :
> > Why the completion handler is not called on timeout in this case ?
>
> Timeoutchecking is done by an UHCI interrupt, which is activated on de
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 10:51:14AM +0200, Thomas Sailer wrote:
> Jean Tourrilhes schrieb:
>
> > purb->timeout = MSECS_TO_JIFFIES(100);
>
> Although it doesn't explain your problems,
> this conversion seems bogus, as USB timeouts
> should be in USB frames, i.e. ms.
>
> Tom
usb-uhci.c, uhci_chec
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 06:09:52PM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> Questions :
> Why the completion handler is not called on timeout in this case ?
Timeoutchecking is done by an UHCI interrupt, which is activated on demand
if there are URBs with a set timeout. If the host controller itsel
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 06:29:41PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> No clues, but the classic two questions for such cases:
>
> - Does it happen also with "uhci"?
Can't use "uhci", it still doesn't implement
USB_ZERO_PACKET. As soon as "uhci" implement USB_ZERO_PACKET, I'll
report on that.
No clues, but the classic two questions for such cases:
- Does it happen also with "uhci"?
- What kernel/driver release?
If "uhci" works better, that's good to know (there's some
expectation that will become the only UHCI HCD at some
point :), and in any case the driver version is important sinc
