On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 04:19:15PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 09:55:21AM +0400, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 02:49:13PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 07:40:46PM +0400, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > > > Any chance to get my other patch re. modify
On Sunday 17 April 2005 8:09 pm, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, David Brownell wrote:
>
> > I just had a thought: maybe one of the reasons Microsoft has such big
> > per-request latencies is that they're using something analgous to tasklets.
> > It's always puzzled me why they go to suc
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, David Brownell wrote:
> > I sense a common theme in these comments! You're clearly concerned about
> > undue delays during submission.
>
> Among other things. As I've pointed out, (non-PIO) HCDs basically do
> only two things: they package URBs for HC DMA hardware, then t
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, David Brownell wrote:
> So basically this was a usb-storage measurement. That's probably a
> worst-case from the HCD perspective, since virtually everything else
> only uses very short queues. (Other than "usbnet", which at full
> speed uses shorter queue lengths; or usb aud
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Using spin_lock_bh() in enqueue or dequeue isn't a solution because
> > existing code already calls these routines with interrupts disabled.
>
> How so? If you convert the irq code to a tasklet, it'll run in a tasklet.
Yes it will. But it will stil
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Mike Lee wrote:
> for example zero.c, it use bcdUSB 0x200 but if you do not set
> GADGET_DUALSPEED. it will not include the device_qualifier, this will
> mislead the host to ask for a descriptor which the device do not know
> and result in a protocol stall.
Like David Br
This patch makes some needlessly global code static.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/usb/net/zd1201.c | 20 +++-
1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.12-rc2-mm3-full/drivers/usb/net/zd1201.c.old 2005-04-18
03:16:40.0
This patch makes a needlessly global function static.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- linux-2.6.12-rc2-mm3-full/drivers/usb/input/usbkbd.c.old2005-04-18
03:09:52.0 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.12-rc2-mm3-full/drivers/usb/input/usbkbd.c2005-04-18
03:10:13.0
This patch makes two needlessly global functions static.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/usb/media/sn9c102_core.c |4 ++--
drivers/usb/media/sn9c102_sensor.h |2 --
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.12-rc2-mm3-full/drivers/usb/m
This patch makes needlessly global code static.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/usb/media/pwc/pwc-ctrl.c | 76 +++
drivers/usb/media/pwc/pwc-if.c |2
drivers/usb/media/pwc/pwc.h |6 --
3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 44
On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 09:55:21AM +0400, Roman Kagan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 02:49:13PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 07:40:46PM +0400, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 01:47:55PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > ChangeSet 1.2181.4.57, 2005/03/24 14:34:40-
On Wednesday 13 April 2005 3:08 pm, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, David Brownell wrote:
>
> > A tasklet for the IRQ handling code wouldn't bother me the way even
> > the concept of one in the submit path does!
>
> I sense a common theme in these comments! You're clearly concerned abou
On Friday 15 April 2005 1:58 pm, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005, David Brownell wrote:
> >
> > Could you summarize what tools you used to generate those numbers?
> > Like what kind of driver(s) were active, with what kind of loads.
> > Audio? Storage? Networking? How about other statis
> > True, but relvant only for irq handlers.
>
> So you agree that it might make sense to move uhci_irq to a tasklet, since
> it _is_ an IRQ handler?
Absolutely. Sorry about being unclear about that.
[..]
> >From the point of view of enqueue, the other code is dequeue and uhci_irq.
> >From t
Dear Alan
> I thought you said you were debugging the controller driver. Why do you
> care what the gadget driver does?
>
> To answer your question: If a gadget driver doesn't support USB 2.0 --
> including GET_DEVICE_QUALIFIER -- then it shouldn't set bcdUSB to 0x0200.
>
for example zero
On Sunday 17 April 2005 8:10 am, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Mike Lee wrote:
>
> > When i debug between with my FC3 linux PC, i found that it keep
> > asking the device for the DEVICE_QUALIFIER descriptor which only
> > support in USB2.0 .I finally change all the gadget driver bcdUSB
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Mike Lee wrote:
> Hi all
> I am now porting controller driver to I.MX motorola ARM9 , i am a
> newbie to usb development. Please correct anything wrong.
>
> When i debug between with my FC3 linux PC, i found that it keep
> asking the device for the DEVICE_QUALIFIER descrip
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > A tasklet can be useful for another reason. Consider that even if an IRQ
> > handler does run with interrupts enabled, its own IRQ line still has to
> > remain disabled. So any devices sharing the IRQ line are unable to
> > interrupt the CPU until th
Hi all
I am now porting controller driver to I.MX motorola ARM9 , i am a
newbie to usb development. Please correct anything wrong.
When i debug between with my FC3 linux PC, i found that it keep
asking the device for the DEVICE_QUALIFIER descriptor which only
support in USB2.0 .I finally change
Am Sonntag, 17. April 2005 04:52 schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> > A tasklet is useful only if you cannot enable interrupts because you are
> > in hard irq context.
>
> A tasklet can be useful for another reason. Consider that even if an IRQ
> handler does run
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005, Michael wrote:
> I've attached my arch/arm/mach-lh7a40x/arch-oscar.c file, where I
> specify that I have this platform device.
Michael, just a side note about the delay function you use:
static void isp1362_delay(struct device *dev, unsigned int
delay)
{
printk(KERN_INF
21 matches
Mail list logo
