On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:56:56AM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 09:07:51AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > Before zzz'ing:
> >
> > db> show intrcnt
> > irq1: atkbd0168
> > irq9: acpi0 8300
> > irc12: psm0 2
> > irq14: ata0 6
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 09:07:51AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 05:34:54PM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > If the USB HC is feeding too many such IRQ's it will be stuck. However,
> > if you see that "uhub_read_port_status()" is called, the kernel is at least
> > ru
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 05:34:54PM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> If the USB HC is feeding too many such IRQ's it will be stuck. However,
> if you see that "uhub_read_port_status()" is called, the kernel is at least
> running, though it might be that some IRQ is stuck, hence the 100% CPU
> usa
On Monday 27 August 2012 14:59:43 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 07:10:22AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > On Monday 05 March 2012 05:17:59 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 09:11:29AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > > > On Friday 02 March 2012 20
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 07:10:22AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Monday 05 March 2012 05:17:59 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 09:11:29AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > > On Friday 02 March 2012 20:25:32 Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> > > > Try the attached patch. At leas
On Monday 05 March 2012 05:17:59 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 09:11:29AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > On Friday 02 March 2012 20:25:32 Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> > > Try the attached patch. At least, it fixed my problem.
> >
> > I've committed your patch with some minor mo
On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 09:11:29AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Friday 02 March 2012 20:25:32 Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> > Try the attached patch. At least, it fixed my problem.
>
> I've committed your patch with some minor modifications.
>
> http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/232448
Unf
On Friday 02 March 2012 20:25:32 Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On Friday 02 March 2012 03:50 am, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 04:55:03PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> > > It does not make a difference for me (i.e., usb suspend/resume
> > > still broken) but I think I found a typo:
> > >
On Friday 02 March 2012 03:50 am, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 04:55:03PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> > It does not make a difference for me (i.e., usb suspend/resume
> > still broken) but I think I found a typo:
> >
> > --- sys/dev/usb/controller/usb_controller.c (revision 232
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 04:14:08PM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Friday 02 March 2012 09:57:03 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 08:48:13AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > > If the reset doesn't work, then try to enable hw.usb.uhub.debug=15 and
> > > see what port c
On Friday 02 March 2012 09:57:03 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 08:48:13AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > If the reset doesn't work, then try to enable hw.usb.uhub.debug=15 and
> > see what port change events are coming.
>
> I don't see such oid hw.usb.uhub.debug. Perhap
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 08:48:13AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> If the reset doesn't work, then try to enable hw.usb.uhub.debug=15 and see
> what port change events are coming.
I don't see such oid hw.usb.uhub.debug. Perhaps it should be hw.usb.debug?
> If cfg=255 in usbconfig, then somet
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 04:55:03PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 01:53 pm, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > What is output from usbconfig as root, before and after
> > suspend/resume ?
Before suspend (just after reboot, this output is identical to pre/post SVN
r229370):
ugen
On Thursday 01 March 2012 22:55:03 Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 01:53 pm, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > On Thursday 01 March 2012 18:11:25 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:22:38PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:28:15PM +0
On Thursday 01 March 2012 01:53 pm, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 18:11:25 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:22:38PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:28:15PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev
wrote:
> > > > I was mistaken, the late
On Thursday 01 March 2012 18:11:25 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:22:38PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:28:15PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > > I was mistaken, the latest kernel with working resume is from Jan 4
> > > 00:00 UTC, kernel from
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:22:38PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:28:15PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > I was mistaken, the latest kernel with working resume is from Jan 4 00:00
> > UTC, kernel from Jan 4 01:00 UTC does not allow my laptop to come back
> > from zzz
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:46:07PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> Can you please try head and/or stable/9? FYI, Linux people found that
> some BIOSes can corrupt low 64KB between suspend/resume, which may
> cause strangeness like this. I worked around it in head (r231781)
> and stable/9 (r232088)
On Monday 27 February 2012 11:47 am, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:47:49AM -0500, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > Yes, I can't think of how r229450 would affect "resume". All it
> > does is clear the high order bit in an error reply from an NFS
> > server, since that bit should never
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:47:49AM -0500, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Yes, I can't think of how r229450 would affect "resume". All it does is
> clear the high order bit in an error reply from an NFS server, since that
> bit should never be set in an NFS error reply and, if set, it results in
> an mbuf li
Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:28:15PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > I was mistaken, the latest kernel with working resume is from Jan 4
> > 00:00
> > UTC, kernel from Jan 4 01:00 UTC does not allow my laptop to come
> > back from
> > zzz(8) successfully. It seems that of
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:28:15PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> I was mistaken, the latest kernel with working resume is from Jan 4 00:00
> UTC, kernel from Jan 4 01:00 UTC does not allow my laptop to come back from
> zzz(8) successfully. It seems that offending change is rev. 1.9.2.5 of
> sys
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 09:57:14AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> Yesterday I've updated my laptop to the latest RELENG_8, it booted just
> fine, however, after coming out of suspend, keyboard does not work (well,
> almost: I can switch between consoles, Caps Lock works, but I cannot type
> anyth
Hi,
Yesterday I've updated my laptop to the latest RELENG_8, it booted just
fine, however, after coming out of suspend, keyboard does not work (well,
almost: I can switch between consoles, Caps Lock works, but I cannot type
anything, login, etc., break into debugger with Ctrl-Alt-Esc). Network
do
24 matches
Mail list logo
