Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Tom Rini
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 06:40:36PM -0400, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > Of course, uhci is only used on x86, so all is fine here, Keep in mind there were (and probably still are) PCI-based UHCI cards. I've got one around here w/ a VIA chip on it. -- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Alan Cox
> > We need a 32bit set bit atomic operation with endian sense. Manfred I think > > proposed a set > > Will this be seen in 2.4? Or is this a 2.5 thing? Well its apparent its needed now, so I think we need to m ake it happen ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To u

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Johannes Erdfelt
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Pete is right here. And if we do the things we want to do to make set_bit > > > error on non ulong one day it'll break completely. > > > > It was Linus' suggestion. Is there another portable way of atomically > > setting a bit? > >

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Alan Cox
> > Pete is right here. And if we do the things we want to do to make set_bit > > error on non ulong one day it'll break completely. > > It was Linus' suggestion. Is there another portable way of atomically > setting a bit? We need a 32bit set bit atomic operation with endian sense. Manfred I th

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Johannes Erdfelt
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > if (td->status & TD_CTRL_ACTIVE) { > > > - td->status |= TD_CTRL_IOC; > > > + set_bit(TD_CTRL_IOC_BIT, &td->status); > > > break; > > > } > > > } > > > > This is

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Johannes Erdfelt
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001, Pete Zaitcev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > @@ -1796,7 +1796,7 @@ > > tmp = tmp->next; > > > > if (td->status & TD_CTRL_ACTIVE) { > > - td->status |= TD_CTRL_IOC; > > + set_bit(TD_CTRL_IOC_BIT, &td->status); > >

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Alan Cox
> > if (td->status & TD_CTRL_ACTIVE) { > > - td->status |= TD_CTRL_IOC; > > + set_bit(TD_CTRL_IOC_BIT, &td->status); > > break; > > } > > } > > This is a very bad idea in my book because set_bit sets bits > in an

Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Pete Zaitcev
> @@ -1796,7 +1796,7 @@ > tmp = tmp->next; > > if (td->status & TD_CTRL_ACTIVE) { > - td->status |= TD_CTRL_IOC; > + set_bit(TD_CTRL_IOC_BIT, &td->status); > break; > } > } This is a ve

[linux-usb-devel] [PATCH 2 of 4] USB uhci bug fix

2001-10-22 Thread Greg KH
Hi, Here's a patch against 2.4.12-ac5 by Johannes that fixes a number of bugs in the uhci driver (including the long stanging BULK_QUEUE bug). This fix is also in 2.4.13-pre6. thanks, greg k-h diff --minimal -Nru a/drivers/usb/uhci.c b/drivers/usb/uhci.c --- a/drivers/usb/uhci.cMon Oc