On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 08:21:20AM +0200, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 19:23:26 -0400
> Tom Rini wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:29:44PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >
> > > Rather than keeping the asynchronous schedule running always, keep
> > > it running only across USB
On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 19:23:26 -0400
Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:29:44PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>
> > Rather than keeping the asynchronous schedule running always, keep
> > it running only across USB mass storage transfers for now, as it
> > seems that keeping it running all
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:29:44PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Rather than keeping the asynchronous schedule running always, keep it
> running only across USB mass storage transfers for now, as it seems
> that keeping it running all the time interferes with certain control
> transfers during
On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 02:29:44PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Rather than keeping the asynchronous schedule running always, keep it
> running only across USB mass storage transfers for now, as it seems
> that keeping it running all the time interferes with certain control
> transfers during
Rather than keeping the asynchronous schedule running always, keep it
running only across USB mass storage transfers for now, as it seems
that keeping it running all the time interferes with certain control
transfers during device enumeration.
Note that running the async schedule all the time
5 matches
Mail list logo