On 02-01-2008 08:00, Greg KH wrote:
...
> If no one has noticed any issues in this area, [...]
...Could also mean there are hidden issues, so it doesn't look like
very convincing argument.
...Unless after the change there will be found no hidden issues,
then, of course, it looks like convincing e
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 01:39:38PM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On 02-01-2008 08:00, Greg KH wrote:
> ...
> > If no one has noticed any issues in this area, [...]
BTW, if 'we' are sure there are no issues, and only lockdep is not
clever enough yet, why not do such a change partially, e.g. with
Hi,
it looks like this RNDIS derived devices really needs jumbo frames.
What is to be done?
Regards
Oliver
-- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --
Betreff: [Bug 8094] ipaq oops on connecting "Vodafone VPA-II"
Datum: Mittwoch 02 Januar 2008
Von: [EMAIL PROTECTE
Am Mittwoch, 2. Januar 2008 schrieb David Brownell:
> On Tuesday 01 January 2008, Karsten Wiese wrote:
> > How about:
> > Urbs stopping/starting at (uFrame % 8) != 0 can share ITDs,
>
> If there's a problem in that area, it should get fixed in a
> patch just addressing that issue. Did you mention
Hello!
> You aren't opening it with O_NDELAY by any chance?
Hopefully not :) Even plain cat exhibits the problem.
> Please look with strace.
| albireo:/home/mj# strace cat /dev/usb/lp0
| execve("/bin/cat", ["cat", "/dev/usb/lp0"], [/* 34 vars */]) = 0
| uname({sys="Linux", node="albireo", ...
On Tue, 1 Jan 2008, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> > You need to do a low-level format of the card. Delete and then
> > recreate the first partition. And then of course you'll have to
> > recreate the VFAT filesystem on it.
>
> That will work, but I don't think it's optimal.
>
> Looking at the logs
On Tue, 1 Jan 2008, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 11:26:43AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 12:49:52PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Sun, 30 Dec 2007, Greg KH wrote:
> > >
> > > > > It looks like Greg misused the debugfs API -- which is ironic, because
> > > > >
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Dave Young wrote:
> > Around a month ago I had a discussion with Peter Zijlstra about the
> > problems in converting the device semaphores to mutexes; you may be
> > able to find it in the LKML archives. Doing the conversion while
> > keeping lockdep happy is a very hard probl
On Tue, 1 Jan 2008, Greg KH wrote:
> For most cases, yes, I agree with this, but due to the lockdep issues
> that occur here, and the whole mess with the suspend path and locking
> the device tree, that has been hashed out many times in the past, I am
> interested in trying to see if there is any
On Wednesday 02 January 2008, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it looks like this RNDIS derived devices really needs jumbo frames.
> What is to be done?
I'm not sure there's a realistic expectation that 16 KBytes can
regularly be allocated through the network stack ... and I'm fairly
sure the rndis
On Wednesday 02 January 2008, Alan Stern wrote:
> BTW, I don't recall ever seeing Tony's patch announced on
> linux-usb or linux-usb-devel. Did I simply miss it?
I think he didn't post it. I got some questions from him at
one point, which I answered, but as I recall he decided for
some re
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:25:11 +0100, Martin Mares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | open("/dev/usb/lp0", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3
> | fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFCHR|0660, st_rdev=makedev(180, 0), ...}) = 0
> | read(3, "", 4096) = 0
> | close(3)= 0
Fi
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
On Dec 30, 2007 11:53 AM, mgross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
What is the linux-usb policies on new drivers that could be
implemented in user space? When does a kernel driver make sense over
a libusb one?
That would be interesting to know.
I myself have been faced wi
On Jan 3, 2008 12:08 AM, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2008, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > For most cases, yes, I agree with this, but due to the lockdep issues
> > that occur here, and the whole mess with the suspend path and locking
> > the device tree, that has been hashed out man
14 matches
Mail list logo
