Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Andrew Buehler <abuehler.kernel@...>
Cc: Oliver Pinter <oliver.pntr@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Greg KH <greg@...>, <linux-scsi@...>, <linux-usb@...>
Date: Saturday, February 16, 2008 - 1:16 pm

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Andrew Buehler wrote:


I (and a lot of other people as well, to judge by the email I receive) 
don't think this is incorrect.  For one thing, it's not always possible 
to tell whether or not the recipient is subscribed to any of the lists.  
For another, getting two copies of a message is no big deal -- more 
irritating (IMO) is getting a rejection message as a result of replying 
to message which was cross-posted to a closed list.  But in each case, 
hitting the "d" key will delete the unwanted message.

In fact, the thing that bothers me the most is when people reply to a 
long email with just a few lines of new text but don't bother to prune 
the long message down to its essential parts.  This forces me to read 
through hundreds of lines containing nothing new or of interest in 
order to obtain a minimal amount of useful information.



People on LKML who are more familiar with interrupt routing problems 
might be able to offer more help.  For now, you can try things like 
turning on CONFIG_USB_DEBUG, posting the output from dmesg, posting the 
contents of /proc/interrupts (say before and after a new USB device is 
plugged in).

Assuming that the 2.6.23 kernel works on your computer, you can go the 
extreme route of installing git and doing a bisection to find the first 
patch causing your difficulty.

Alan Stern

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Andrew Buehler, (Fri Feb 15, 5:45 pm)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Oliver Pinter, (Sat Feb 16, 10:32 am)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Alan Stern, (Sat Feb 16, 11:20 am)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Andrew Buehler, (Sat Feb 16, 12:46 pm)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Paul Jackson, (Sun Feb 17, 3:20 am)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Andrew Buehler, (Sun Feb 17, 12:17 pm)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Paul Jackson, (Sun Feb 17, 12:20 pm)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Alan Stern, (Sat Feb 16, 1:16 pm)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Andrew Buehler, (Sat Feb 16, 5:33 pm)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Sergey Vlasov, (Sun Feb 17, 6:55 am)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Andrew Buehler, (Sat Feb 16, 9:12 pm)
[OT] GMail (was USB regression (and other failures)...), Joseph Fannin, (Sun Feb 17, 12:10 am)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Alan Stern, (Sat Feb 16, 11:35 pm)
Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]*, Andrew Buehler, (Sun Feb 17, 12:21 pm)