On Mon, 1 Sep 2014, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 09/01/2014 12:36 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> > After some time of use (one hour or so) my system started to behave
> > "weird". I did check dmesg and I was receiving the following line
> > again and again:
> >
> > usb-storage: Error in
I could offer you a net3380 usb gadget device (mini pcie or pcie) but
the uPD720200 is my notebook, so I cannot afford an extra one for you
:)
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Mathias Nyman
wrote:
> On 09/01/2014 02:19 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
>> Do you have a NEC/Renesas uPD720200 USB
On 09/01/2014 02:19 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> Do you have a NEC/Renesas uPD720200 USB 3.0 Host?
>
> If so, try with an usb gadget acting as a mass storage. That hits the
> bug in my machine.
>
Thanks for the tip, but currently I only got Intel hosts.
btw I earlier meant to say that
Do you have a NEC/Renesas uPD720200 USB 3.0 Host?
If so, try with an usb gadget acting as a mass storage. That hits the
bug in my machine.
Regarsd!
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 09/01/2014 01:26 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
>> Well, it is hard to say. rc2
On 09/01/2014 01:26 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> Well, it is hard to say. rc2 without the patch showed more warnings,
> but never crashed badly (queuecommand_lck).
>
> The sample size is not big enough. maybe rc2 also has the
> queuecommand_lck bug, but I havent hit it.
>
Ok, I
Well, it is hard to say. rc2 without the patch showed more warnings,
but never crashed badly (queuecommand_lck).
The sample size is not big enough. maybe rc2 also has the
queuecommand_lck bug, but I havent hit it.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 09/01/2014 12:36
On 09/01/2014 12:36 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> After some time of use (one hour or so) my system started to behave
> "weird". I did check dmesg and I was receiving the following line
> again and again:
>
> usb-storage: Error in queuecommand_lck: us->sfb= 8805bd61ccc0
>
> I did
After some time of use (one hour or so) my system started to behave
"weird". I did check dmesg and I was receiving the following line
again and again:
usb-storage: Error in queuecommand_lck: us->sfb= 8805bd61ccc0
I did disconnect the usb device and the whole computer crashed :S
On Mon,
Hello
The promised dmesg output. Still some "xhci_drop_endpoint called with..."
Thanks!
Sep 1 10:52:00 neopili kernel: [ 193.123108] usb 2-2: new SuperSpeed
USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
Sep 1 10:52:00 neopili kernel: [ 193.142204] usb 2-2: New USB device
found, idVendor=0525,
Hello
The promised dmesg output. Still some xhci_drop_endpoint called with...
Thanks!
Sep 1 10:52:00 neopili kernel: [ 193.123108] usb 2-2: new SuperSpeed
USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
Sep 1 10:52:00 neopili kernel: [ 193.142204] usb 2-2: New USB device
found, idVendor=0525,
After some time of use (one hour or so) my system started to behave
weird. I did check dmesg and I was receiving the following line
again and again:
usb-storage: Error in queuecommand_lck: us-sfb= 8805bd61ccc0
I did disconnect the usb device and the whole computer crashed :S
On Mon, Sep
On 09/01/2014 12:36 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
After some time of use (one hour or so) my system started to behave
weird. I did check dmesg and I was receiving the following line
again and again:
usb-storage: Error in queuecommand_lck: us-sfb= 8805bd61ccc0
I did disconnect
Well, it is hard to say. rc2 without the patch showed more warnings,
but never crashed badly (queuecommand_lck).
The sample size is not big enough. maybe rc2 also has the
queuecommand_lck bug, but I havent hit it.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Mathias Nyman mathias.ny...@intel.com wrote:
On 09/01/2014 01:26 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Well, it is hard to say. rc2 without the patch showed more warnings,
but never crashed badly (queuecommand_lck).
The sample size is not big enough. maybe rc2 also has the
queuecommand_lck bug, but I havent hit it.
Ok, I won't
Do you have a NEC/Renesas uPD720200 USB 3.0 Host?
If so, try with an usb gadget acting as a mass storage. That hits the
bug in my machine.
Regarsd!
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Mathias Nyman mathias.ny...@intel.com wrote:
On 09/01/2014 01:26 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Well, it is
On 09/01/2014 02:19 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Do you have a NEC/Renesas uPD720200 USB 3.0 Host?
If so, try with an usb gadget acting as a mass storage. That hits the
bug in my machine.
Thanks for the tip, but currently I only got Intel hosts.
btw I earlier meant to say that I
I could offer you a net3380 usb gadget device (mini pcie or pcie) but
the uPD720200 is my notebook, so I cannot afford an extra one for you
:)
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Mathias Nyman
mathias.ny...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On 09/01/2014 02:19 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Do you have a
On Mon, 1 Sep 2014, Mathias Nyman wrote:
On 09/01/2014 12:36 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
After some time of use (one hour or so) my system started to behave
weird. I did check dmesg and I was receiving the following line
again and again:
usb-storage: Error in queuecommand_lck:
On 08/28/2014 06:09 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> Sure, but the hw leaves my desk until next monday in 30 minutes.
>
> So unless you send the patch right now you will have to wait for
> results until next Monday
>
> Thanks!
>
Great, anytime you can test it is appreciated.
Added the
On 08/28/2014 06:09 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Sure, but the hw leaves my desk until next monday in 30 minutes.
So unless you send the patch right now you will have to wait for
results until next Monday
Thanks!
Great, anytime you can test it is appreciated.
Added the patch to
Sure, but the hw leaves my desk until next monday in 30 minutes.
So unless you send the patch right now you will have to wait for
results until next Monday
Thanks!
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 08/28/2014 03:36 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
>> Hello Mathias
On 08/28/2014 03:36 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> Hello Mathias
>
> This is the dmesg output after your patch. No WARN(), no crash :), but
> still some weird messages:
>
> [ 146.511623] usb 2-2: new SuperSpeed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
> [ 146.531652] usb 2-2: New USB device
Hello Mathias
This is the dmesg output after your patch. No WARN(), no crash :), but
still some weird messages:
[ 146.511623] usb 2-2: new SuperSpeed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
[ 146.531652] usb 2-2: New USB device found, idVendor=0525, idProduct=a4a5
[ 146.531661] usb 2-2: New USB
Hello
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 08/27/2014 07:10 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
>> Perhaps we could apply both patches to current tree and backport mine
>> to older kernels?
>>
>
> The already applied patch fixes many other issues than just this one.
>
On 08/27/2014 07:10 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> Perhaps we could apply both patches to current tree and backport mine
> to older kernels?
>
The already applied patch fixes many other issues than just this one.
backporting it to stable < 3.13 turned out to not be that difficult, stable
On 08/27/2014 07:10 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Perhaps we could apply both patches to current tree and backport mine
to older kernels?
The already applied patch fixes many other issues than just this one.
backporting it to stable 3.13 turned out to not be that difficult, stable
Hello
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Mathias Nyman mathias.ny...@intel.com wrote:
On 08/27/2014 07:10 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Perhaps we could apply both patches to current tree and backport mine
to older kernels?
The already applied patch fixes many other issues than just
Hello Mathias
This is the dmesg output after your patch. No WARN(), no crash :), but
still some weird messages:
[ 146.511623] usb 2-2: new SuperSpeed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
[ 146.531652] usb 2-2: New USB device found, idVendor=0525, idProduct=a4a5
[ 146.531661] usb 2-2: New USB
On 08/28/2014 03:36 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Hello Mathias
This is the dmesg output after your patch. No WARN(), no crash :), but
still some weird messages:
[ 146.511623] usb 2-2: new SuperSpeed USB device number 2 using xhci_hcd
[ 146.531652] usb 2-2: New USB device found,
Sure, but the hw leaves my desk until next monday in 30 minutes.
So unless you send the patch right now you will have to wait for
results until next Monday
Thanks!
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Mathias Nyman mathias.ny...@intel.com wrote:
On 08/28/2014 03:36 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado
Perhaps we could apply both patches to current tree and backport mine
to older kernels?
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 08/27/2014 05:14 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
>> At least I have seen the issue on Debian 3.14 and 3.16. Is your patch
>> going to be
On 08/27/2014 05:14 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> At least I have seen the issue on Debian 3.14 and 3.16. Is your patch
> going to be backported to linux-stable? The computer crashes very very
> badly
>
Yes, it is, but it might need some additional work as it won't apply cleanly on
older
On 08/26/2014 06:47 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
> While testing a usb gadget I managed to crash completely the host
> computer. This was due to a NULL pointer derefence.
>
> This patch avoids the crash although the kernel still outputs some
> warnings.
>
> Without this patch, kernels from
At least I have seen the issue on Debian 3.14 and 3.16. Is your patch
going to be backported to linux-stable? The computer crashes very very
badly
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 08/26/2014 06:47 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
>> While testing a usb gadget I
At least I have seen the issue on Debian 3.14 and 3.16. Is your patch
going to be backported to linux-stable? The computer crashes very very
badly
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Mathias Nyman mathias.ny...@intel.com wrote:
On 08/26/2014 06:47 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
While testing a
On 08/26/2014 06:47 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
While testing a usb gadget I managed to crash completely the host
computer. This was due to a NULL pointer derefence.
This patch avoids the crash although the kernel still outputs some
warnings.
Without this patch, kernels from (at
On 08/27/2014 05:14 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
At least I have seen the issue on Debian 3.14 and 3.16. Is your patch
going to be backported to linux-stable? The computer crashes very very
badly
Yes, it is, but it might need some additional work as it won't apply cleanly on
older
Perhaps we could apply both patches to current tree and backport mine
to older kernels?
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Mathias Nyman mathias.ny...@intel.com wrote:
On 08/27/2014 05:14 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
At least I have seen the issue on Debian 3.14 and 3.16. Is your patch
While testing a usb gadget I managed to crash completely the host
computer. This was due to a NULL pointer derefence.
This patch avoids the crash although the kernel still outputs some
warnings.
Without this patch, kernels from (at least) 3.14 can be crashed with
mass storage gadgets.
Affected
While testing a usb gadget I managed to crash completely the host
computer. This was due to a NULL pointer derefence.
This patch avoids the crash although the kernel still outputs some
warnings.
Without this patch, kernels from (at least) 3.14 can be crashed with
mass storage gadgets.
Affected
40 matches
Mail list logo
