Le Thursday 26 April 2007 22:44:59 Jay Vosburgh, vous avez écrit :
> Chris Snook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Summary :
> >>Got this trace when one network interface come down or up in a 2
> >>interfaces bonding. So far, system seems to surviv
Le Sunday 29 April 2007 13:18:31 Jiri Kosina, vous avez écrit :
>
> Hi Vincent,
Hi Jiri,
>
> yes, the device is messed up, but it shouldn't have any consequences for
> you - the HID driver is able to correctly handle that, so as soon as we
> don't need to add any extra quirks for such dev
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
> > No, it isn't a problem in the USB core. The device itself is messed up;
> > it really does report idVendor and idProduct both equal to 0.
> So is it just a scary trace but without consequence that i could ignored
> ? May i ask you what is the devic
Le Saturday 28 April 2007 00:32:37 Andrew Morton, vous avez écrit :
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:05:28 +0200
>
> because we thought we'd fixed the rtnl_lock() problems in 2.6.21-rc7-mm2.
> Are you sure that log is from 2.6.21-rc7-mm2?
Yes. I have retested it another time ( for adding the small usb d
Le Saturday 28 April 2007 21:50:30 Alan Stern, vous avez écrit :
> No, it isn't a problem in the USB core. The device itself is messed up;
> it really does report idVendor and idProduct both equal to 0.
>
> Jiri, don't worry about all those other devices in the listing that also
> have idVendor an
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
>
> > > I now don't immediately see how this could happen - the vendor ID
> > > seems to be propagated properly from hid_probe() (nothing has been
> > > changed in this codepath), so this would mean that hid_p
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
> > I now don't immediately see how this could happen - the vendor ID
> > seems to be propagated properly from hid_probe() (nothing has been
> > changed in this codepath), so this would mean that hid_probe() has
> > been passed usb_interface for which
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
With your patch it seems like idVendor passed is 0. You could see it there ;
http://mail1.vetienne.net/linux/dmesg.2.6.21-rc7-mm2+patch-usbhid
I could confirm that the keyboard is working ( yesterday i was just behind the
box due to test on the netwo
Le Saturday 28 April 2007 00:42:45 Jiri Kosina, vous avez écrit :
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Greg KH wrote:
> > > BUG: at drivers/hid/usbhid/hid-quirks.c:480 usbhid_exists_dquirk()
>
> [ .. stacktraces stripped .. ]
>
> > Jiri, any thoughts about this? This looks like it comes from your tree
> > as 2
Hi Jiri,
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Jiri Kosina wrote:
Paul, do you have any idea? In fact, what was your reason for putting this
WARN_ON() there?
The static quirk list uses idVendor == 0 to mark the end of
hid_blacklist[], so we don't expect any device to have idVendor == 0. If
a device is corr
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> This BUG (it's in fact a warning) is this one:
>WARN_ON(idVendor == 0);
> I now don't immediately see how this could happen - the vendor ID seems
> to be propagated properly from hid_probe() (nothing has been changed in
> this codepath), so this
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Greg KH wrote:
> > BUG: at drivers/hid/usbhid/hid-quirks.c:480 usbhid_exists_dquirk()
[ .. stacktraces stripped .. ]
> Jiri, any thoughts about this? This looks like it comes from your tree
> as 2.6.21 doesn't have the drivers/hid/usbhid/ directory...
Paul (author of the co
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 11:25:46AM +0200, VE (HOME) wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:58:32 +0200 Vincent ETIENNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > This was due to locking bustage in the net tree. It should be fixed
> > in 2.6.21-rc7-mm2.
>
> I have tried this ve
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:25:46 +0200 "VE \(HOME\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:58:32 +0200 Vincent ETIENNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > This was due to locking bustage in the net tree. It should be fixed
> > in 2.6.21-rc7-mm2.
>
> I ha
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:58:32 +0200 Vincent ETIENNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
This was due to locking bustage in the net tree. It should be fixed
in 2.6.21-rc7-mm2.
I have tried this version. Same problem ( see
http://mail1.vetienne.net/linux/dmesg-2.6.21-rc7-mm2.log )
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:58:32 +0200 Vincent ETIENNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apr 26 11:09:34 jupiter2 RTNL: assertion failed at
> net/ipv4/devinet.c
> (1055) Apr 26 11:09:34 jupiter2
> Apr 26 11:09:34 jupiter2 Call Trace:
> Apr 26 11:09:3
Le Thursday 26 April 2007 22:44:59 Jay Vosburgh, vous avez écrit :
> Chris Snook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Summary :
> >>Got this trace when one network interface come down or up in a 2
> >>interfaces bonding. So far, system seems to surviv
Chris Snook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Summary :
>> Got this trace when one network interface come down or up in a 2
>> interfaces bonding. So far, system seems to survive to this problem
>> and works fine.
>
>I'm investigating a similar/p
Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
Hi,
Summary :
Got this trace when one network interface come down or up in a 2
interfaces bonding. So far, system seems to survive to this problem
and works fine.
I'm investigating a similar/possibly identical bug. Do you experience
packe
Hi,
Summary :
Got this trace when one network interface come down or up in a 2
interfaces bonding. So far, system seems to survive to this problem
and works fine.
Full description
During testing of bonding of 2 interfaces, i have seen this from
tim
20 matches
Mail list logo