On Sun, 4 Feb 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 4. Februar 2007 17:07 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> >
> > > If you want simplicity, I'd suggest serialization. kmalloc for 4 bytes
> > > is overkill. I think it is even faster if we block on the cases ther
On Sun, 4 Feb 2007, Prakash Punnoor wrote:
> Am Sonntag 04 Februar 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
>
> > Prakash, here's an alternative patch. It should work just as well as the
> > previous one (don't try to apply them both!).
>
> Seems to work fine for me. Nice work! Out of curiousity. Did the git-b
Am Sonntag, 4. Februar 2007 17:07 schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> > If you want simplicity, I'd suggest serialization. kmalloc for 4 bytes
> > is overkill. I think it is even faster if we block on the cases there's
> > a collision that go through kmalloc/kfree ea
Am Sonntag 04 Februar 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> Prakash, here's an alternative patch. It should work just as well as the
> previous one (don't try to apply them both!).
Seems to work fine for me. Nice work! Out of curiousity. Did the git-bisect
point to the correct change?
Cheers,
--
(°=
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> If you want simplicity, I'd suggest serialization. kmalloc for 4 bytes
> is overkill. I think it is even faster if we block on the cases there's
> a collision that go through kmalloc/kfree each time.
On the other hand, the same routine calls usb_control_
Am Sonntag, 4. Februar 2007 05:11 schrieb Pete Zaitcev:
> On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 17:02:27 -0500 (EST), Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > + buffer = kmalloc(sizeof(*buffer), GFP_NOIO);
>
> Why is this GFP_NOIO, if it's not in the path of block I/O? Or is it?
It is used by usb_reset_device
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 17:02:27 -0500 (EST), Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> + buffer = kmalloc(sizeof(*buffer), GFP_NOIO);
Why is this GFP_NOIO, if it's not in the path of block I/O? Or is it?
-- Pete
-
Using Tomca
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Samstag, 3. Februar 2007 23:02 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > Obviously we can't afford to use a single dedicated buffer like this.
> > Each thread reading a hub's port status will have to provide its own
> > buffer, or more simply, we will have to allocate
Am Samstag, 3. Februar 2007 23:02 schrieb Alan Stern:
> That's not a problem as far as the hardware is concerned. But both
> threads call hub_port_status(), which reads the status into a dedicated
> buffer at hub->status->port. Even though the URBs are serialized, on
> non-cache-coherent archi
Am Samstag, 3. Februar 2007 23:02 schrieb Alan Stern:
> Obviously we can't afford to use a single dedicated buffer like this.
> Each thread reading a hub's port status will have to provide its own
> buffer, or more simply, we will have to allocate a buffer dynamically for
> every read instead of
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Prakash Punnoor wrote:
> Ok, here you go. I hope I did everything correctly. I applied the patch.
> recompiled and installed the modules unloaded present modules and put the
> newly compiled in. Attached the usbmon log and dmesg. calling
> sane-find-scanner 2x success, 2x fa
Am Samstag 03 Februar 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> So here's what I'd like you to do. First, apply the diagnostic patch
> below, and make sure you have CONFIG_USB_DEBUG turned on. Then run your
> test just like before, and do it enough times to get some examples where
> sane-find-scanner doesn't f
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Prakash Punnoor wrote:
> Am Freitag 02 Februar 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > When you have a chance, please try hooking the scanner up to that bad hub
> > port again, and use the usbmon facility. Instructions are in the kernel
> > source file Documentation/usb/usbmon.txt. Star
Am Freitag 02 Februar 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> When you have a chance, please try hooking the scanner up to that bad hub
> port again, and use the usbmon facility. Instructions are in the kernel
> source file Documentation/usb/usbmon.txt. Start acquiring the usbmon log
> before running sane, an
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, Prakash Punnoor wrote:
> Am Freitag 02 Februar 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > When you have a chance, please try hooking the scanner up to that bad hub
> > port again, and use the usbmon facility. Instructions are in the kernel
> > source file Documentation/usb/usbmon.txt. Star
Am Freitag 02 Februar 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> When you have a chance, please try hooking the scanner up to that bad hub
> port again, and use the usbmon facility. Instructions are in the kernel
> source file Documentation/usb/usbmon.txt. Start acquiring the usbmon log
> before running sane, an
16 matches
Mail list logo
