On Sun, 16 May 2004 02:25:14 -0500
Al Borchers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You suggested a workaround to this a few months ago, but it was not
> the correct solution. I hope that is not the patch you are suggesting.
> That patch did not solve the problem and risked out of order writes.
It doe
Pete --
Pete Zaitcev wrote:
Pete Zaitcev wrote:
Please rerun your tests on 2.4.26 and report me the results. I worked
around this problem for 2.4 already, so it's not an issue anymore.
It is still there--see the oops below. Can you tell me what changes
were made that might affect this problem?
I t
On Sun, 16 May 2004 01:53:19 -0500
Al Borchers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> > Please rerun your tests on 2.4.26 and report me the results. I worked
> > around this problem for 2.4 already, so it's not an issue anymore.
>
> It is still there--see the oops below. Can you tell
Pete Zaitcev wrote:
Please rerun your tests on 2.4.26 and report me the results. I worked
around this problem for 2.4 already, so it's not an issue anymore.
It is still there--see the oops below. Can you tell me what changes
were made that might affect this problem?
You can see that in usbserial s
On Fri, 14 May 2004 15:08:30 -0500
Al Borchers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This late in the 2.4 development cycle, I don't really know. If it
> > fixes real bugs, probably. Otherwise I doubt it.
>
> As we have talked about before, the semaphore in usbserial write leads
> to an oops if the se
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 03:08:30PM -0500, Al Borchers wrote:
> Greg --
>
> >>Also, I still plan to backport the USB serial locking from 2.6 to
> >>2.4, if you will accept that.
> >
> >This late in the 2.4 development cycle, I don't really know. If it
> >fixes real bugs, probably. Otherwise I dou
Greg --
Also, I still plan to backport the USB serial locking from 2.6 to
2.4, if you will accept that.
This late in the 2.4 development cycle, I don't really know. If it
fixes real bugs, probably. Otherwise I doubt it.
As we have talked about before, the semaphore in usbserial write leads
to an
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 02:17:58AM -0500, Al Borchers wrote:
> Greg --
>
> Greg KH wrote:
> >Speaking of which, I'm getting a lot of complaints from users of the
> >latest devices that they do not work with the current kernel code. It
> >looks like you and Peter are offering up a kernel patch to
Greg --
Greg KH wrote:
Speaking of which, I'm getting a lot of complaints from users of the
latest devices that they do not work with the current kernel code. It
looks like you and Peter are offering up a kernel patch to help some
people with this.
Care to send it to me, as I am getting tired of
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 08:06:49AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 12:13:23AM -0500, Al Borchers wrote:
> > How about io_edgeport and io_ti driver bug fixes and
> > enhancements for 2.4--are you still interested in
> > such patches?
>
> Of course, as long as you also provide 2.6 pa
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 12:13:23AM -0500, Al Borchers wrote:
> How about io_edgeport and io_ti driver bug fixes and
> enhancements for 2.4--are you still interested in
> such patches?
Of course, as long as you also provide 2.6 patches first :)
thanks,
greg k-h
-
Greg --
Just read about udev. Exactly the sort of thing we need.
Unfortunately not many IO Networks customers are using 2.6
yet.
I understand why you wouldn't want to change the 2.4
usbserial to do this sort of thing.
How about io_edgeport and io_ti driver bug fixes and
enhancements for 2.4--are
On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 01:04:59AM -0500, Al Borchers wrote:
> Greg --
>
> Several IO Networks EdgePort users have requested the ability
> to explicitly assign serial ports to USB serial devices, regardless
> of the order the devices are plugged in.
Great, tell them to use the 2.6 kernel and udev
13 matches
Mail list logo
