[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200711010325.55147.sfking@fdwdc.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 03:25:54 -0700
From: Steven King <sfking@...dc.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, linux-usb-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: ti_usb_3410_5052 breakage in 2.6.24-rc1
Per a suggestion by David Brownwell, rebuilt with CONFIG_USB_DEBUG enabled and
loading usbserial and ti_usb_3410_5052 with debug=1, I see in 'dmesg'
'drivers/usb/serial/usb-serial.c: wrong number of endpoints'
which is pretty much what I expected, throwing some more printk's in
usb-serial gives:
drivers/usb/serial/usb-serial.c: num_interrupt_in = 0, expected 1
drivers/usb/serial/usb-serial.c: num_interrupt_out = 0, expected 0
drivers/usb/serial/usb-serial.c: num_bulk_in = 0, expected 1
drivers/usb/serial/usb-serial.c: num_bulk_out = 1, expected 1
Okay, so
---
Changing num_interrupt_in and num_bulk_in from 1 to NUM_DONT_CARE makes
ti_usb_3410_5052 work again, but is it the right thing to do?
Signed-off-by: Steven King <sfking@...dc.com>
---
ti_usb_3410_5052.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c
b/drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c
index 1f01494..337f5ce 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c
@@ -264,8 +264,8 @@ static struct usb_serial_driver ti_1port_device = {
.description = "TI USB 3410 1 port adapter",
.usb_driver = &ti_usb_driver,
.id_table = ti_id_table_3410,
- .num_interrupt_in = 1,
- .num_bulk_in = 1,
+ .num_interrupt_in = NUM_DONT_CARE,
+ .num_bulk_in = NUM_DONT_CARE,
.num_bulk_out = 1,
.num_ports = 1,
.attach = ti_startup,
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists