Dear Russell:
I have a favour to ask of you. I need the following patch to be applied
to the USB core:
diff -urpN -X dontdiff linux-2.6.11-rc1-bk4/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c
linux-2.6.11-rc1-bk4-lem/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c
--- linux-2.6.11-rc1-bk4/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c 2005-01-12 16:35:53.000000000
-0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-rc1-bk4-lem/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c 2005-01-17
21:38:51.000000000 -0800
@@ -1099,14 +1104,12 @@ static int hcd_submit_urb (struct urb *u
urb = usb_get_urb (urb);
atomic_inc (&urb->use_count);
- if (urb->dev == hcd->self.root_hub) {
+ if (usb_pipedevice(urb->pipe) == 1) {
/* NOTE: requirement on hub callers (usbfs and the hub
* driver, for now) that URBs' urb->transfer_buffer be
* valid and usb_buffer_{sync,unmap}() not be needed, since
* they could clobber root hub response data.
*/
- urb->transfer_flags |= (URB_NO_TRANSFER_DMA_MAP
- | URB_NO_SETUP_DMA_MAP);
status = rh_urb_enqueue (hcd, urb);
goto done;
}
@@ -1168,7 +1171,7 @@ unlink1 (struct usb_hcd *hcd, struct urb
{
int value;
- if (urb->dev == hcd->self.root_hub)
+ if (usb_pipedevice(urb->pipe) == 1)
value = usb_rh_urb_dequeue (hcd, urb);
else {
@@ -1258,7 +1261,7 @@ static int hcd_unlink_urb (struct urb *u
* finish unlinking the initial failed usb_set_address()
* or device descriptor fetch.
*/
- if (!hcd->saw_irq && hcd->self.root_hub != urb->dev) {
+ if (!hcd->saw_irq && usb_pipedevice(urb->pipe) != 1) {
dev_warn (hcd->self.controller, "Unlink after no-IRQ? "
"Controller is probably using the wrong IRQ."
"\n");
@@ -1465,12 +1468,8 @@ void usb_hcd_giveback_urb (struct usb_hc
{
urb_unlink (urb);
- // NOTE: a generic device/urb monitoring hook would go here.
- // hcd_monitor_hook(MONITOR_URB_FINISH, urb, dev)
- // It would catch exit/unlink paths for all urbs.
-
/* lower level hcd code should use *_dma exclusively */
- if (hcd->self.controller->dma_mask) {
+ if (hcd->self.controller->dma_mask && usb_pipedevice(urb->pipe) != 1) {
if (usb_pipecontrol (urb->pipe)
&& !(urb->transfer_flags & URB_NO_SETUP_DMA_MAP))
dma_unmap_single (hcd->self.controller, urb->setup_dma,
However, David objects to the patch on the grounds that it can damage ARM.
I am sure that what I do matches perfectly what ARM needs, based on this:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/usb/2.5/usb-core-2-2.5.33.patch
# This was first noticed on ARM (no surprises here); the root hub
# code, rh_call_control(), placed data into the buffer and then
# called usb_hcd_giveback_urb(). This function called
# pci_unmap_single() on this region which promptly destroyed the
# data that rh_call_control() had placed there. This lead to a
# corrupted device descriptor and the "too many configurations"
# message.
So, it would help me a lot if you tested the patch on a system with SA-1111
against a regression and thus buried this silly ARM canard decisively.
Please let me know if you have time to help me out.
Thank you,
-- Pete
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
