On Wednesday 13 October 2004 1:59 am, Russell King wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 07:01:41PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> >
> > SOFs have to start within something like 3msec after
> > the reset finishes. What's with punting all this to a BH?
>
> The badly written SL811 driver code. 8)
:)
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 07:01:41PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 October 2004 3:16 pm, Russell King wrote:
> > 3. bh discovers the device speed and enables SOFs
> > 4. some time later, the USB subsystem issues a reset, which disables SOFs
>
> Strictly speaking, speed isn't known unt
On Tuesday 12 October 2004 3:16 pm, Russell King wrote:
> No - this bug is completely specific to the way the SL811 code is
> interacting.
Except in its description; similar bugs have shown up with
other HCDs!
> The basic sequence of events is:
>
> 1. receive interrupt for insertion/removal.
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 01:57:43PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 October 2004 9:41 am, Russell King wrote:
>
> > > I suspect that problem isn't associated with Lothar's code at all;
> > > a lot of folk have been running into problems like that lately.
> >
> > Actually it is. After
On Tuesday 12 October 2004 9:41 am, Russell King wrote:
> > I suspect that problem isn't associated with Lothar's code at all;
> > a lot of folk have been running into problems like that lately.
>
> Actually it is. After running the SL811HS against the SA1110 UDC driver,
> the problem comes out
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 06:10:22PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 10 October 2004 9:43 am, Russell King wrote:
>
> > 7. This one is the killer. Once it's been hacked to compile, plugging
> >in a USB flash key results in:
> >
> > usb 1-1: new full speed USB device using address 2
>
On Sunday 10 October 2004 9:43 am, Russell King wrote:
> 7. This one is the killer. Once it's been hacked to compile, plugging
>in a USB flash key results in:
>
> usb 1-1: new full speed USB device using address 2
> usb 1-1: device not accepting address 2, error -110
> usb 1-1: new full spee
On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 11:13:27AM +0200, Lothar Wassmann wrote:
> Hi Russell and David,
>
> Russell King writes:
> > File comments are important, and we as a whole community should be
> > jumping on people who do not correctly modify these as soon as they
> > send a driver for review. It is simp
Hi Russell and David,
Russell King writes:
> File comments are important, and we as a whole community should be
> jumping on people who do not correctly modify these as soon as they
> send a driver for review. It is simply not acceptable to claim that
> someone else owns the work when they've nev
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 01:54:16PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> I had some misgivings about teaching the OHCI code
> to act that way, but haven't had a chance to look at
> the code in any detail. I was pleased to have seen two
> reports of success using it (you did try the "current
> working ver
On Tuesday 28 September 2004 1:22 pm, Russell King wrote:
> So, all in all, I'd like to get the existing SL811 driver to a
> _runnable_ state to evaluate whether it performs any better than
> this other seemingly dodgy ohci-emulating driver.
If you're willing to do that work with the existing dri
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 06:55:15AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 27 September 2004 3:20 pm, Russell King wrote:
> > This driver doesn't appear to build as a module in current 2.6 kernel
> > sources, namely because it references usb_kill_urb_queue which isn't
> > exported.
> >
> > What w
On Monday 27 September 2004 3:20 pm, Russell King wrote:
> This driver doesn't appear to build as a module in current 2.6 kernel
> sources, namely because it references usb_kill_urb_queue which isn't
> exported.
>
> What would be the correct way to fix this?
There's a new SL-811 driver from Lot
13 matches
Mail list logo
