On 6 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold said:
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 01:49:13PM +, Nix wrote:
>> On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
>> > On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:14:49PM +, Nix wrote:
>
>> > Could you try two more things (too make sure line control is really the
>> > culprit):
>> >
>> > 1.
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 01:49:13PM +, Nix wrote:
> On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
> > On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:14:49PM +, Nix wrote:
> > Could you try two more things (too make sure line control is really the
> > culprit):
> >
> > 1. If you clear HUPCL in ekeyd so that the lines
On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:14:49PM +, Nix wrote:
>> >> > What if you
>> >> > physically disconnect and reconnect the device instead, or simply
>> >>
>> >> That fixes it, in fact it's the only way to
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 01:49:13PM +, Nix wrote:
On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:14:49PM +, Nix wrote:
Could you try two more things (too make sure line control is really the
culprit):
1. If you clear HUPCL in ekeyd so that the lines are never
On 6 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold said:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 01:49:13PM +, Nix wrote:
On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:14:49PM +, Nix wrote:
Could you try two more things (too make sure line control is really the
culprit):
1. If you clear HUPCL
On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:14:49PM +, Nix wrote:
What if you
physically disconnect and reconnect the device instead, or simply
That fixes it, in fact it's the only way to fix it once it's
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:14:49PM +, Nix wrote:
> On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold stated:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 04:44:46PM +, Nix wrote:
> >> Sorry for the delay: illness and work-related release time flurries.
> >>
> >> On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
> >>
> > The log
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 15:14:49 +, Nix wrote:
> > Did you get anywhere with trying to look at the device firmware?
> Look at it? Only Daniel Silverstone (Cc:ed) can do that. The only copy
> of the firmware I have is baked into the sealed key. :)
Sadly I can't look at the exact firmware of
On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold stated:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 04:44:46PM +, Nix wrote:
>> Sorry for the delay: illness and work-related release time flurries.
>>
>> On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
>>
>> > [ +CC: linux-usb ]
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 04:44:46PM +, Nix wrote:
> Sorry for the delay: illness and work-related release time flurries.
>
> On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
>
> > [ +CC: linux-usb ]
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> >> On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 04:44:46PM +, Nix wrote:
Sorry for the delay: illness and work-related release time flurries.
On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
[ +CC: linux-usb ]
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
On
On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold stated:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 04:44:46PM +, Nix wrote:
Sorry for the delay: illness and work-related release time flurries.
On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
[ +CC: linux-usb ]
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 22 Oct
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 15:14:49 +, Nix wrote:
Did you get anywhere with trying to look at the device firmware?
Look at it? Only Daniel Silverstone (Cc:ed) can do that. The only copy
of the firmware I have is baked into the sealed key. :)
Sadly I can't look at the exact firmware of the
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:14:49PM +, Nix wrote:
On 5 Nov 2014, Johan Hovold stated:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 04:44:46PM +, Nix wrote:
Sorry for the delay: illness and work-related release time flurries.
On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
The log appears incomplete
Sorry for the delay: illness and work-related release time flurries.
On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
> [ +CC: linux-usb ]
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
>>
>> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> >>
Sorry for the delay: illness and work-related release time flurries.
On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
[ +CC: linux-usb ]
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 14 Oct
On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
> [ +CC: linux-usb ]
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
>>
>> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> >> On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
>> >>
>> >> > On Sun, Oct 12,
[ +CC: linux-usb ]
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
> >> On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> >> >> I
[ +CC: linux-usb ]
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
I have checked: this
On 24 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold told this:
[ +CC: linux-usb ]
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 04:36:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM
On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
>>
>> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> >> I have checked: this code is being executed against a symlink that
>> >> points to
On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold uttered the following:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
>>
>> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> >> I have checked: this code is being executed against a symlink that
>> >>
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> >> I have checked: this code is being executed against a symlink that
> >> points to /dev/ttyACM0, and the tcsetattr() succeeds. (At least,
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> I have checked: this code is being executed against a symlink that
>> points to /dev/ttyACM0, and the tcsetattr() succeeds. (At least, it's
>> succeeding on the kernel I'm running now, but of course
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
I have checked: this code is being executed against a symlink that
points to /dev/ttyACM0, and the tcsetattr() succeeds. (At least, it's
succeeding on the kernel I'm running now, but of course that's
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
I have checked: this code is being executed against a symlink that
points to /dev/ttyACM0, and the tcsetattr() succeeds. (At least, it's
On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold uttered the following:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
I have checked: this code is being executed against a symlink that
points to
On 22 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
I have checked: this code is being executed against a symlink that
points to /dev/ttyACM0, and the
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:21:35PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
> > Another thing you could try is to add back the
> >
> > acm_set_control(acm, 0);
> >
> > just after the dev_info message in probe.
>
> "Add back" suggests that this line existed before this
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:21:35PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
Another thing you could try is to add back the
acm_set_control(acm, 0);
just after the dev_info message in probe.
Add back suggests that this line existed before this change. It
didn't,
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
> Another thing you could try is to add back the
>
> acm_set_control(acm, 0);
>
> just after the dev_info message in probe.
"Add back" suggests that this line existed before this change. It
didn't, as far as I can see. Probing has
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold outgrape:
Another thing you could try is to add back the
acm_set_control(acm, 0);
just after the dev_info message in probe.
Add back suggests that this line existed before this change. It
didn't, as far as I can see. Probing has
acm_set_control(acm,
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold spake thusly:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> On 12 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
>>
>> > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> >> On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
>> >>
>> >> > Having been privy to the
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 12 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> >> On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
> >>
> >> > Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
> >> > with
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 12 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
with no implementation
On 14 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold spake thusly:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:36:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 12 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it
On 12 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
>>
>> > Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
>> > with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
>>
>> That's
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
>
> > Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
> > with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
>
> That's what I thought. (Why would something that just
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
>
> > Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplistic,
> > with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
>
> That's what I thought. (Why would something that just
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplistic,
with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
That's what I thought. (Why would something that just provides data
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
That's what I thought. (Why would something that just provides data
On 12 Oct 2014, Johan Hovold verbalised:
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:24:59PM +0100, Nix wrote:
On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
That's what I thought.
On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
> Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
> with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
That's what I thought. (Why would something that just provides data at a
constant rate way below that of even the slowest
Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
--
Paul Martin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
[Cc:ed someone who knows the people behind the Entropy Key: they're not
being manufactured at the moment, but he might want to know anyway]
On 5 Sep 2014, n...@esperi.org.uk stated:
> On 1 Sep 2014, Oliver Neukum stated:
>
>>> I'll do a bisection of the cdc-acm changes since 3.15 tomorrow night
[Cc:ed someone who knows the people behind the Entropy Key: they're not
being manufactured at the moment, but he might want to know anyway]
On 5 Sep 2014, n...@esperi.org.uk stated:
On 1 Sep 2014, Oliver Neukum stated:
I'll do a bisection of the cdc-acm changes since 3.15 tomorrow night and
Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
--
Paul Martin p...@debian.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
On 11 Oct 2014, Paul Martin spake thusly:
Having been privy to the firmware of the eKey, it is very simplisting,
with no implementation whatsoever of any flow control.
That's what I thought. (Why would something that just provides data at a
constant rate way below that of even the slowest USB
48 matches
Mail list logo
