Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Add Teac HD-35PU devices to unusual_devs.h to fix I/O
> errors resulting from wrong residue values returned
> by the device.
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I help run SCALE (Southern
California Linux Expo), and that always kills a good week or so for me.
Anway
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:58:34 -0500 (EST), Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pete, you probably will want to make a similar change to ub.
Done, thanks, Alan. Just one more reason to kill ub, I guess.
-- Pete
-
Take Sur
Looks good to me.
Matt
Signed-off-by: Matthew Dharm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 12:47:18PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 10:14:41 -0800 Matthew Dharm wrote:
>
> > Do we want to make those comments depend on USB && !USB_STORAGE ?
>
> I don't think that it matte
On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 10:14:41 -0800 Matthew Dharm wrote:
> Do we want to make those comments depend on USB && !USB_STORAGE ?
I don't think that it matters very much, but I changed & tested it
anyway.
---
From: Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
USB_STORAGE was changed from "select" SCSI to depends
Do we want to make those comments depend on USB && !USB_STORAGE ?
Matt
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 08:04:44PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> USB_STORAGE was changed from "select" SCSI to depends on SCSI
> at some point, so change the "comment" text to match t
Sergey Vlasov wrote:
For some reason the unusual_devs.h entry for Sony Ericsson P990i had
three identical copies in a wrong place in the file in addition to the
correct entry.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Vlasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
heh. Sweet. Thanks for the cleanup. Looks good to me. I'm yanking lkm
Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:59:21 -0400, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 12:25:37PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:01:32 +0100, Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
When you plug the device in, usb-storage picks
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:59:21 -0400, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 12:25:37PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:01:32 +0100, Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > When you plug the device in, usb-storage picks it up, but during th
2006/5/23, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> ok but my point is if the US_FLIDX_URB_ACTIVE bit is still set after waiting,
> doesn't that mean that the URB doesn't complete normally ? If so we should
> call usb_unlink_urb whatever the value of "timeout".
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> ok so the code can be rewritten as following:
>
>clear_bit(US_FLIDX_URB_ACTIVE, &us->flags);
>if (timeout <= 0) {
>US_DEBUGP("%s -- cancelling URB\n", !timeout ?
> "Timeout" : "Signal");
>usb_unlink_urb(u
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> >>> + if (test_and_clear_bit(US_FLIDX_URB_ACTIVE, &us->flags) && timeout <=
> >>> 0) {
> >> Thinking more about it, I'm wondering it the second condition (timeout <=
> >> 0)
> >> is really needed. Do you think so ?
> >
> > The test is needed becaus
Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
>
>> Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
>>> /* wait for the completion of the URB */
>>> - wait_for_completion(&urb_done);
>>> - clear_bit(US_FLIDX_URB_ACTIVE, &us->flags);
>>> + timeout = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(
>>> +
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> > /* wait for the completion of the URB */
> > - wait_for_completion(&urb_done);
> > - clear_bit(US_FLIDX_URB_ACTIVE, &us->flags);
> > + timeout = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(
> > + &urb_
Am Dienstag, 23. Mai 2006 11:40 schrieb Franck Bui-Huu:
>
> and use completion timeout instead of. It also put the task
> in interruptible state instead of uninterruptible one while
> waiting for the completion.
1. You seem to have changed the semantics of the no timeout case. May you?
2. You don
Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> /* wait for the completion of the URB */
> - wait_for_completion(&urb_done);
> - clear_bit(US_FLIDX_URB_ACTIVE, &us->flags);
> + timeout = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(
> + &urb_done, timeout ? : MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
>
Daniel Drake wrote:
> Alan Stern wrote:
>
>> If the device sometimes reports the correct values, then you should
>> include NEED_OVERRIDE flag to prevent messages about unnecessary
>> overrides showing up in the system log. Also, if bInterfaceSubclass
>> is correct and only bInterfaceProtocol is
Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
>
>
>>When connected over USB2, this device reports a nonsense bInterfaceProtocol
>>value 6 and doesn't work with usb-storage.
>>When connected over USB1, the device reports the correct bInterfaceProtocol
>>value 0x50 (bulk) and works
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Daniel Drake wrote:
> When connected over USB2, this device reports a nonsense bInterfaceProtocol
> value 6 and doesn't work with usb-storage.
> When connected over USB1, the device reports the correct bInterfaceProtocol
> value 0x50 (bulk) and works with no problems.
>
> T
On Sun, 26 Sep 2004, Joris van Rantwijk wrote:
> The MusicDrive chip (used in some USB flash drive MP3 players)
> incorrectly reports residues on large (64k) data transfers.
> This patch adds an UNUSUAL_DEV entry for the device to make the Linux
> transport code ignore the residue count on reads f
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, Deti Fliegl wrote:
> Alan Stern wrote:
> > The correct thing to do is to create a new entry in unusual_devs.h. The
> > instructions for submitting such changes are given at the top of the
> > source file.
> understood and ready to the receive a brown paper bag award. It's
>
Alan Stern wrote:
The correct thing to do is to create a new entry in unusual_devs.h. The
instructions for submitting such changes are given at the top of the
source file.
understood and ready to the receive a brown paper bag award. It's
somehow simpler now :)
--- unusual_devs.h 2003-07-0
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, Deti Fliegl wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I recently bought a Sony DSC P-10 digital camera which is a USB 2.0 mass
> storage device. Unfortunately the usb-storage driver included in 2.4.21
> does not recognize it. After I did some simple modifications (attachted
> to this mail) to
That probably means it is a usb-storage device, but it would still stop me
buying it... (not that it matters to this people I'm bothering with this
email, sorry).
On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Pasi Matilainen wrote:
> Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 5. Juli 2002 23:22 schrieb Alan Cox:
> >
> N
Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Freitag, 5. Juli 2002 23:22 schrieb Alan Cox:
>
Note: due to the DRM protection used by the player, you can't just
copy MP3s to it for listening; you'll still have to use the Nokia
Audio Mana=
>>>
>>>ger
>>>
>>>
on Windoze for that.
>>>
>>In which case th
Am Freitag, 5. Juli 2002 23:22 schrieb Alan Cox:
> > > Note: due to the DRM protection used by the player, you can't just
> > > copy MP3s to it for listening; you'll still have to use the Nokia
> > > Audio Mana=
> >
> > ger
> >
> > > on Windoze for that.
>
> In which case there is no point putting
> > Note: due to the DRM protection used by the player, you can't just copy
> > MP3s to it for listening; you'll still have to use the Nokia Audio Mana=
> ger
> > on Windoze for that.
In which case there is no point putting this entry in. It would be better
to visibly blacklist the device and pri
Guess I not be buying that then. Sounded interesting and I need a new
phone...
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Pasi Matilainen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's a small patch that makes the usb-storage driver work with the Nokia
> 5510 phone. The phone has an MP3 player with 64MB of flash, which can be
> accessed a
On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 12:35:09AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>Yes, I must keep coming back until this is cleared up.
> ...
> >>[Can the author of that code (try to) check that the locking stuff is OK?]
>
> > Could you enable the debugging
>
> Problem has been found and fixed. A wild
>>Yes, I must keep coming back until this is cleared up.
...
>>[Can the author of that code (try to) check that the locking stuff is OK?]
> Could you enable the debugging
Problem has been found and fixed. A wild pointer was created,
and what happened afterwards was essentially random. Below
Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 04:28:22AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>== Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
>>
>>Yes, I must keep coming back until this is cleared up.
>>
>>2.5.14 works.
>>2.5.15 works.
>>2.5.16 hangs upon insmod usb-storage
>>2.5.16 wi
>> Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
Obscure problems. However, this patch fixes things.
--- /linux/2.5/linux-2.5.18/linux/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c Tue May 21
07:07:37 2002
+++ /linux/2.5/linux-2.5.18a/linux/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c Sun May 26
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 04:28:22AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> == Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
>
> Yes, I must keep coming back until this is cleared up.
>
> 2.5.14 works.
> 2.5.15 works.
> 2.5.16 hangs upon insmod usb-storage
> 2.5.16 with the usb/storage d
>>Simple fix: just make control urbs queue, rather than reporting the
>>need to do so as an error ... :)
>
> Well spoken, you lucky OHCI programmer ;-) But Intel thought: "10K gates
> for an USB controller are enough, let the driver writers do the rest...".
Yeah, that _almost_ felt like cheatin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
>
> You ask: what silly code - why write things that way?
> I agree entirely. But this silly code occurred five times,
> and after the patch it occurs once. That is a much better
> starting point if one wants to improve this code.
Like for example, it's now practical to m
== Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
Yes, I must keep coming back until this is cleared up.
2.5.14 works.
2.5.15 works.
2.5.16 hangs upon insmod usb-storage
2.5.16 with the usb/storage directory replaced by that from 2.5.15 works
The patch from 2.5.15 to 2.5.16 is 130
> One minor nit, can you make sure I can
> apply the patch using '-p1'?
Yes - I generate my patches still in Linus-pre-BK style.
Will change.
___
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Veg
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:54:27PM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> Well, okay. But you have to understand my skepticism... I've communicated
> with literally dozens of people who were very eager and willing to work on
> usb-storage, and they (at most) contributed one patch and then disappeared.
He
On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 11:39:50PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Created the first of a series of usb-storage patches
> this afternoon. Please find it below or on ftp.XX.kernel.org
> under people/aeb/2.5.16-us-patch .
> It removes 5% of the usb-storage code, but should, if I made
> no mistake,
Well, okay. But you have to understand my skepticism... I've communicated
with literally dozens of people who were very eager and willing to work on
usb-storage, and they (at most) contributed one patch and then disappeared.
Let's merge the patch and see where it takes us.
Matt
On Tue, May 21,
> I don't quite understand your reasoning for not completing
> the code consolidation.
Not so impatient.
The perfect development model is small steps, frequent updates.
If there is a bug in 2.5.N+1 and things work in 2.5.N and the
change between them is a simple and obvious one, then it is very
And that would be a fair answer. But:
(a) If that's the case, I'd like to _know_ it (instead of your guess).
(b) I'd also like to know that he _really_ intends to take the next few
steps.
Other than that, the patch looks fine. But I'd really hate to introduce a
couple of new files only to have
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 12:58:02PM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> Andries --
>
> I don't mean to sound as if you're inventing functions... I just mean that,
> if you're going to reduce 5 copies to 2, why not reduce 5 copies to one
> instead?
>
> I don't quite understand your reasoning for not com
Andries --
I don't mean to sound as if you're inventing functions... I just mean that,
if you're going to reduce 5 copies to 2, why not reduce 5 copies to one
instead?
I don't quite understand your reasoning for not completing the code
consolidation.
Matt
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 09:07:44PM +02
Okay, now I'm seeing where you are headed...
So why are you creating all these new functions and not just using the
control/bulk messaging functions in transport.c, which do all the
scatter-gather management for you?
Matt
Well, you see, in my own tree I h
Okay, now I'm seeing where you are headed...
So why are you creating all these new functions and not just using the
control/bulk messaging functions in transport.c, which do all the
scatter-gather management for you?
Matt
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 12:21:51PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ach,
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 07:47:25AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> >But this problem is new, AFAIR I only changed the message, not the
> >detection. Thus the HID driver has more than one control URB outstanding...
> >I will look into that...
>
> Or it could be he's running into that problem where
> But this problem is new, AFAIR I only changed the message, not the
> detection. Thus the HID driver has more than one control URB outstanding...
> I will look into that...
Or it could be he's running into that problem where sometimes hotplugging
does things at the same time the HID driver does.
Ach, too quick.
> diff -urb
that should have been "diff -urbN". Sorry about that.
Am not going to send the diff once more. Below the new files.
raw_bulk.h
#ifndef _USB_STORAGE_RAW_BULK_H_
#define _USB_STORAGE_RAW_BULK_H_
/* usb bulk */
extern int usb_storage_send_control(
str
>> Matt, you asked for a diff -b. But can't you make that yourself?
> I could, in theory, make a diff -b myself. However, then I would have an
> extra development tree on my machine to keep track of, and that's something
> I like to avoid.
Hmm. I just typed
% cd /tmp
% tar xfz /linux/2.5/linux
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 08:16:17PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > Initializing USB Mass Storage driver...
> > usb.c: registered new driver usb-storage
> > usb-uhci-hcd.c: ENXIO (Control) 8400, flags 0, urb ce1b9120, burb ce1b90c0,
>propably device driver bug...
> > input: USB HID v1.00 Device [
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 10:13:40PM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> I could, in theory, make a diff -b myself. However, then I would have an
> extra development tree on my machine to keep track of, and that's something
> I like to avoid.
Wait till you start using bk, I have about 20 different kerne
I could, in theory, make a diff -b myself. However, then I would have an
extra development tree on my machine to keep track of, and that's something
I like to avoid.
Matt
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 03:22:42AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> It is not clear to me why these CF and SM drivers sh
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 04:46:50AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> == Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
>
> It is a bit late, but I just compiled a kernel.
>
> CONFIG_USB=y
> CONFIG_USB_DEVICEFS=y
> CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD=y
>
> etc.
>
> Now usbview doesnt work, even t
== Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
It is a bit late, but I just compiled a kernel.
CONFIG_USB=y
CONFIG_USB_DEVICEFS=y
CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD=y
etc.
Now usbview doesnt work, even though usbdevfs is mounted.
I consider that a bug in the usbdevfs code.
After the mount th
>> It is not clear to me why these CF and SM drivers should
>> replace sg buffers by a single big contiguous buffer.
> No, they should not be using a single big buffer. They
> should use the scatter-gather list that was given to them by the midlayer.
Good. I hoped you would say that. That again
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
>
> I hoped that everybody would have problems, so that the source
> of the problems would be immediately obvious to someone who
> knows USB and the recent changes better.
So far it's fine ... but then I've
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 09:33:12PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is it documented someplace what requirements a driver
> should obey? It feels as if several usb-storage things
> are not in a perfect shape. But I know so little about
> the surroundings.
Do you mean a USB driver? If so, there
I have a similar problem on my machine with a 2.4.18 kernel after patching
ACPI patches. usb-storage hangs.
On Monday 20 May 2002 15:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
>
> I hoped that everybody would have problems, so that the source
>
>> Matt, is this patch ok to apply?
> Yes and no.
> Parts of it look okay, and parts don't.
Can you be more precise? Or is the plural just your single following remark?
> why have retries dropped from 10 to 3 in one place?
Yes, you spotted the only change in behaviour,
apart from possible chan
> Andries, what kind of USB problems did you have with 2.5.16?
I hoped that everybody would have problems, so that the source
of the problems would be immediately obvious to someone who
knows USB and the recent changes better.
I have only vague reports.
Do "insmod usb-storage". The insmod hangs
Yes and no.
Parts of it look okay, and parts don't. What immediately jumps out at me
are a couple of changes that I can't identify the reasoning -- i.e. why
have retries dropped from 10 to 3 in one place?
Perhaps I just haven't stared at this enough. Only about 2 hours ago did I
get synced up
On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 03:37:00PM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> Is this patch against the latest code (i.e. Greg's super merge)? Or has
> that material not yet been released? I saw the patch go out, but I'm still
> getting up-to-speed on the Bitkeeper stuff
Yes, everything that went out in
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 01:01:40AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> BTW - Now that I write anyway, a question: One of the things
> I did was replacing half a dozen identical copies of some
> scatter-gather code by a single copy.
> But is it really necessary to have even this single copy?
> It is
Is this patch against the latest code (i.e. Greg's super merge)?
Or has that material not yet been released? I saw the patch go out,
but I'm still getting up-to-speed on the Bitkeeper stuff
The patch was against 2.5.16.
I know that CVS repositories exist, but so far have never l
Is this patch against the latest code (i.e. Greg's super merge)? Or has
that material not yet been released? I saw the patch go out, but I'm still
getting up-to-speed on the Bitkeeper stuff
Matt
--
Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maintainer, Linux USB M
On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 07:33:18PM -0800, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> Greg et al --
>
> Attached to this message is a patch for usb-storage against 2.4.18-rc4.
> Please apply. Greg, it should also be applied to 2.5.x, but I don't have a
> good patch against that version. So, if you want to try to ma
Leif --
Is there any reason these devices cannot use the ScanLogic firmware update
which is posted on their web page? That firmware fixes the problem at it's
source
Matt
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 09:37:58AM -0900, Leif Sawyer wrote:
> Matthew Dharm writes:
> >
> > Attached to this message i
Matthew Dharm writes:
>
> Attached to this message is a patch for usb-storage against
> 2.4.18-rc4.
> Please apply.
> [snip-ola]
Matt,
Here is an updated patch which adds ScanLogic USB devices
reported by myself, Rene Engelhard, Peter Wächtler, Dylan Egan, and Ashley
Pittman.
This was origina
Matthew Dharm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This should finish off the 2.4.x work for me. After this, I'll be looking
> towards 2.5, unless something comes up to keep me with 2.4 issues.
What about this patch? It makes sure to clean up resources in two
error paths in storage_probe().
--- stora
69 matches
Mail list logo
