[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0804021244230.5042-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 12:48:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>
cc: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>, <pavel@...e.cz>,
<oliver@...kum.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <jikos@...e.cz>, <gregkh@...e.de>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb ehci_iaa_watchdog fix
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Mark Lord wrote:
> Yup, that does indeed cure it.
> Here's a patch, in case you didn't already generate one:
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Lord <mlord@...ox.com>
>
> --- rc8/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hcd.c 2008-03-11 11:18:40.000000000 -0400
> +++ linux/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hcd.c 2008-04-02 12:16:40.000000000 -0400
> @@ -289,9 +289,7 @@
> * (a) SMP races against real IAA firing and retriggering, and
> * (b) clean HC shutdown, when IAA watchdog was pending.
> */
> - if (ehci->reclaim
> - && !timer_pending(&ehci->iaa_watchdog)
> - && HC_IS_RUNNING(ehci_to_hcd(ehci)->state)) {
> + if (ehci->reclaim && !timer_pending(&ehci->iaa_watchdog)) {
> u32 cmd, status;
>
> /* If we get here, IAA is *REALLY* late. It's barely
Okay, I'm puzzled. How could this make any difference?
ehci_bus_suspend() calls end_unlink_async() anyway, whenever reclaim is
set.
Is the real problem that it does so before calling ehci_work() instead
of after calling ehci_halt()?
Mark, if you want to experiment some more, try reverting your patch
above and moving:
if (ehci->reclaim)
end_unlink_async(ehci);
in ehci-hub.c:ehci_bus_suspend() to just after the line saying:
hcd->state = HC_STATE_SUSPENDED;
Alan Stern
--
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