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@...>, Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Greg KH <greg@...>, SCSI development list <linux-scsi@...>, USB list <linux-usb@...>
Date: Saturday, February 16, 2008 - 11:35 pm

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Andrew Buehler wrote:


It's not unreasonable.  Neither is Aristotelian physics.  Nevertheless, 
neither one is a good match to reality.

Why not arrange instead that messages sent from a mailing list server
_do_ get filtered into the corresponding folder, even if they were also
sent to your address?  This certainly should make your assumption (that
messages not filtered into any mailing-list folder are specifically
intended for you) much more valid than it is now.


Well, I _am_ receiving your messages by way of linux-usb as well as
directly, for whatever that's worth.



Go into the /sys/bus/pci/drivers/ehci_hcd directory.  Then for each 
symbolic link to a controller device listed there, write the device's 
name (with "echo -n") to the "unbind" file.  For example,

	echo -n 0000:00:1d.7 >unbind

That will have nearly the same effect as unloading ehci-hcd.


ACPI isn't directly related to USB; rather it has to do with
transferring information between the OS and the
BIOS/vendor-specific-hardware.  Power management is example where such
a transfer is needed.  In your case, the relevant information is which
IRQ is connected to which motherboard device.  If you don't have ACPI
enabled in your configuration, then perhaps that's the problem -- try
enabling it.


Maybe they aren't.  But when you have multiple bugs, you have to fix
them one at a time.


I don't know, but you should wait until the simpler problem is sorted 
out before tackling the more complicated ones.

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]*, 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)