On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 01:27:39PM -0600, Dane Johnson wrote: > > Greg, > > Thanks for the quick response! > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 01:47:53PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 12:19:08PM -0600, Dane Johnson wrote: > > > > setserial does not work with usb-serial devices, but should not give you > > a lockup. Again, does this happen without the low latency patch? > > I was able to retry my tests this morning without the low latency > patch. Identical results. One inaccuracy -- in minicom if I issue > 'at' I get an OK, but anything else (ie, atdt, atz, etc.) results in > ERROR.
In looking at the logs, the device is correctly sending and receiving the data. It's the modem that is sending back "ERROR". I don't see any problems with the driver. You might check that you have the modem properly set up :) > Again, 'setserial -a /dev/ttyUSB0' locks up the machine hard. Not good. If you ever are able to capture an oops from this, please let me know. > I forgot to note that this is a transmeta based laptop and, therefore, > has OHCI. I have access to UHCI hardware, though, and I'll try > rerunning these tests over on it, too, to see if I get the same behavior. Shouldn't matter. > I did so (on a standard 2.4.17 kernel) and I'm including the syslog > output below. It's opaque to me, but it looks like whatever operations > 0x5401 and 0x5402 are, they aren't supported, and also that there's an > error in closing the port when minicom is exiting. The error is normal. It just means that you were not trying to write something when we shut down. Sorry, but it looks like everything is working properly :) thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-users
