[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YfLPvF6pmcL1UG2f@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 12:00:44 -0500
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] usbnet: add devlink support
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 12:13:53PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 12:07:42PM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > The weakest link of usbnet devices is the USB cable.
>
> The weakest link of any USB device is the cable, why is this somehow
> special to usbnet devices?
>
> > Currently there is
> > no way to automatically detect cable related issues except of analyzing
> > kernel log, which would differ depending on the USB host controller.
> >
> > The Ethernet packet counter could potentially show evidence of some USB
> > related issues, but can be Ethernet related problem as well.
> >
> > To provide generic way to detect USB issues or HW issues on different
> > levels we need to make use of devlink.
>
> Please make this generic to all USB devices, usbnet is not special here
> at all.
Even more basic question: How is the kernel supposed to tell the
difference between a USB issue and a HW issue? That is, by what
criterion do you decide which category a particular issue falls under?
Alan Stern
Powered by blists - more mailing lists