lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 29 Aug 2017 12:56:20 +0800
From:   Kai-Heng Feng <>
To:     Mathias Nyman <>
Cc:     Greg KH <>,,, USB list <>,
        LKML <>,
        "Tsai, Nicholas" <>,
        Nehal Shah <>,
        Ramkumar Subramaniyan <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "xhci: Limit USB2 port wake support for AMD
 Promontory hosts"

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:14 PM, Mathias Nyman
<> wrote:
> 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.

At least I can't find "Disable USB2" on my ASUS PRIME B350M-A, so the
new behavior is quite surprising.

> 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.

You looped them to the mail thread which I reported the regression two
weeks ago, and there is no response since then...

> Thanks
> -Mathias

Powered by blists - more mailing lists