[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <59A3ECF2.8050406@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 13:14:10 +0300
From: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
Cc: mathias.nyman@...el.com, Lars_Chang@...edia.com.tw,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Tsai, Nicholas" <nicholas.tsai@....com>,
Nehal Shah <Nehal-bakulchandra.Shah@....com>,
Ramkumar Subramaniyan <ramkumar.ks@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "xhci: Limit USB2 port wake support for AMD
Promontory hosts"
On 28.08.2017 12:29, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 05:14:47PM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
>> This reverts commit dec08194ffeccfa1cf085906b53d301930eae18f.
>>
>> Commit dec08194ffec ("xhci: Limit USB2 port wake support for AMD Promontory
>> hosts") makes all high speed USB ports on ASUS PRIME B350M-A cease to
>> function after enabling runtime PM.
>>
>> All boards with this chipsets will be affected, so revert the commit.
>>
>> Conflicts:
>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-pci.c
>> drivers/usb/host/xhci.h
>
> Why are these "Conflicts:" lines here, you did fix up the issues, so
> there shouldn't be any more conflicts.
>
> And if you revert this, don't we still have the original problem here?
>
Adding more people who were involved in the original patch.
Users are now seeing the unresponsive USB2 ports with Promontory hosts.
Is there any update on a better way to solve the original issue.
To me a "dead" USB2 port seems like a much worse issue for a user
than a BIOS disabled port waking up on plug/unplug (wake on connect/disconnect),
so I'm myself in favor of doing this revert.
But there was a strong push from Promontory developers to get the original fix in,
and I would like to get some comment from them before I do anything about it.
Thanks
-Mathias
Powered by blists - more mailing lists