On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 12:59:07PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 04:42:42PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > Could you please discard this one for now? I've found a couple of more
> > PM related problems and I'll submit a slight update of this one as part
> > of a
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 04:42:42PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:58:12PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > The current ACM runtime-suspend implementation is broken in several
> > ways:
> >
> > Firstly, it buffers only the first write request being made while
> > suspended
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:58:12PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> The current ACM runtime-suspend implementation is broken in several
> ways:
>
> Firstly, it buffers only the first write request being made while
> suspended -- any further writes are silently dropped.
>
> Secondly, writes being
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:58:12PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
The current ACM runtime-suspend implementation is broken in several
ways:
Firstly, it buffers only the first write request being made while
suspended -- any further writes are silently dropped.
Secondly, writes being dropped
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 04:42:42PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:58:12PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
The current ACM runtime-suspend implementation is broken in several
ways:
Firstly, it buffers only the first write request being made while
suspended -- any
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 12:59:07PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 04:42:42PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
Could you please discard this one for now? I've found a couple of more
PM related problems and I'll submit a slight update of this one as part
of a larger
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:13:17AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:35:19AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 21:58 +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >
> > > Fix this by implementing a delayed-write queue using urb anchors and
> > > making sure to discard the
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:35:19AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 21:58 +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> > Fix this by implementing a delayed-write queue using urb anchors and
> > making sure to discard the queue properly at shutdown.
>
> Looks very good, with one exception:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 04:24:10PM +0800, Xiao Jin wrote:
> On 04/15/2014 03:58 AM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > Jin, did you check what closing_wait setting your application is using?
>
> I check the closing_wait is 30s by default. Below is the trace we get
> when reproduced problem.
>
>
On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 21:58 +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Fix this by implementing a delayed-write queue using urb anchors and
> making sure to discard the queue properly at shutdown.
Looks very good, with one exception: acm_tty_close() must
synchronously resume the device so that the anchor is
Hi, Johan,
On 04/15/2014 03:58 AM, Johan Hovold wrote:
The current ACM runtime-suspend implementation is broken in several
ways:
Firstly, it buffers only the first write request being made while
suspended -- any further writes are silently dropped.
Secondly, writes being dropped also leak
Hi, Johan,
On 04/15/2014 03:58 AM, Johan Hovold wrote:
The current ACM runtime-suspend implementation is broken in several
ways:
Firstly, it buffers only the first write request being made while
suspended -- any further writes are silently dropped.
Secondly, writes being dropped also leak
On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 21:58 +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
Fix this by implementing a delayed-write queue using urb anchors and
making sure to discard the queue properly at shutdown.
Looks very good, with one exception: acm_tty_close() must
synchronously resume the device so that the anchor is
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 04:24:10PM +0800, Xiao Jin wrote:
On 04/15/2014 03:58 AM, Johan Hovold wrote:
Jin, did you check what closing_wait setting your application is using?
I check the closing_wait is 30s by default. Below is the trace we get
when reproduced problem.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:35:19AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 21:58 +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
Fix this by implementing a delayed-write queue using urb anchors and
making sure to discard the queue properly at shutdown.
Looks very good, with one exception:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:13:17AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:35:19AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 21:58 +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
Fix this by implementing a delayed-write queue using urb anchors and
making sure to discard the queue
The current ACM runtime-suspend implementation is broken in several
ways:
Firstly, it buffers only the first write request being made while
suspended -- any further writes are silently dropped.
Secondly, writes being dropped also leak write urbs, which are never
reclaimed (until the device is
The current ACM runtime-suspend implementation is broken in several
ways:
Firstly, it buffers only the first write request being made while
suspended -- any further writes are silently dropped.
Secondly, writes being dropped also leak write urbs, which are never
reclaimed (until the device is
18 matches
Mail list logo
