Our friends at sony are at it again. The DSC-T1 needs a new entry. Note
that it's the same VID & PID as the last entry, but different version.
Greg, please apply.
Matt
# This is a BitKeeper generated diff -Nru style patch.
#
# ChangeSet
# 2004/02/21 23:36:04-08:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# The
This patch changes some error checking so that some bogus devices (like the
Fuji Finepix 1400) will work.
This is basically relaxing a test on a field that the spec says "should
always be zero"
Greg, please apply.
Matt
# This is a BitKeeper generated diff -Nru style patch.
#
# ChangeSet
# 20
This one-liner removes an unneeded macro.
Greg, please apply.
Matt
# This is a BitKeeper generated diff -Nru style patch.
#
# ChangeSet
# 2004/02/22 00:05:10-08:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Remove unneeded macro.
#
# drivers/usb/storage/usb.h
# 2004/02/22 00:04:56-08:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED] +0 -1
This patch tightens up the conditions under which an auto-sense will be
cleared. It also fixes the comment associated with the code.
Greg, please apply.
Matt
# This is a BitKeeper generated diff -Nru style patch.
#
# ChangeSet
# 2004/02/22 00:14:51-08:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Tighten the sen
> Back last fall you mentioned something about needing to add a workaround
> to the UHCI driver's port reset code for VIA hardware. It had to do with
> making sure the controller was suspended before doing the reset. Can you
> remember the details? Is it still needed?
Hi Alan, this work around
That state model isn't as clean as it might be, but so
far that hasn't been an issue ... and it was better than
what went before, where there was no notion of what sorts
of operations made sense. (Queuing urbs to disabled HCDs,
for example, never makes sense.)
Is the main point then to keep trac
Alan Stern wrote:
If an HCD needs
mutual exclusion for any purpose, it must handle that itself.
Does the PCI layer at least guarantee that it won't call through any of
the other routines while either probe or remove is running?
Nope. It's common to start getting IRQs during probe, for
Mark McClelland wrote:
Ludwig Balke wrote:
2. which reasons ar possible for the message "already running port x
disabled by hub (EMI?), re-enabling...". Is it always electromagnetic
interference?
Not always. Anything with an external power source that is attached to
the computer is suspect. .
Is there any documentation, other than the code, on how to use the
module uinput.c?
TIm
---
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click N
I made the following experiment on different machines and different kernels
(2.4.18, 2.4.20, 2.4.21):
-plug usb-mouse in
- do "cat /dev/usbmouse" and move the mouse and you will see characters
streaming in your console (that's fine)
- now disconnect the usb-mouse and reconnect it
- moving the mo
Thanks a lot for your explanations and diagnositic advice.
I think the cause for the problems I described is indeed induced by electric
noise.
Or in other words: shit happens.
But the point is: after shit happened there is some cleanup work to do and
this is indeed a software question. Since t
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Duncan Sands wrote:
> I should mention (down here at the bottom of the email where hopefully no-one
> from VIA is going to notice :) ), that I did quite a bit of rummaging around inside
> VIA's "filter driver" for windows. This driver (which you can get from their
> website)
Hi Dave,
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 09:52:33AM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> As I understand, Windows doesn't handle config changes very well, and
> so it "mandates" that the MSFT-specific configurations be first.
> The main purpose for this heuristic is to avoid those dodgey MSFT
> policies ... th
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, David Brownell wrote:
> >>That state model isn't as clean as it might be, but so
> >>far that hasn't been an issue ... and it was better than
> >>what went before, where there was no notion of what sorts
> >>of operations made sense. (Queuing urbs to disabled HCDs,
> >>for ex
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, David Brownell wrote:
> Alan Stern wrote:
> >> If an HCD needs
> >>mutual exclusion for any purpose, it must handle that itself.
> >
> >
> > Does the PCI layer at least guarantee that it won't call through any of
> > the other routines while either probe or remove is ru
I had my Linksys prism2 USB wireless adapter (WUSB11 v2.5) working
reasonably well with kernel 2.4.23, but with kernel 2.6.3 (and udev 018)
I get:
usb 1-1: new full speed USB device using address 5
drivers/usb/core/config.c: invalid interface number (1/1)
usb 1-1: can't read configurations, erro
So, many people have complained about the warning message that usb-storage
gives. It really wasn't very good.
How does this strike people? At this point, I'm looking for comments (not
to have this applied).
Of course, this assumes that someone does add something to the FAQ.
Matt
= drivers
On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 01:11:34AM +, Robert Gadsdon wrote:
> I had my Linksys prism2 USB wireless adapter (WUSB11 v2.5) working
> reasonably well with kernel 2.4.23, but with kernel 2.6.3 (and udev 018)
> I get:
>
> usb 1-1: new full speed USB device using address 5
> drivers/usb/core/confi
On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 09:20:58PM +0100, Ludwig Balke wrote:
> I made the following experiment on different machines and different kernels
> (2.4.18, 2.4.20, 2.4.21):
>
> -plug usb-mouse in
> - do "cat /dev/usbmouse" and move the mouse and you will see characters
> streaming in your console (th
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 17:23:17 -0800 Matthew Dharm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| So, many people have complained about the warning message that usb-storage
| gives. It really wasn't very good.
|
| How does this strike people? At this point, I'm looking for comments (not
| to have this applied).
|
20 matches
Mail list logo
