From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756865AbZCFT1E (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2009 14:27:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753685AbZCFT0w (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2009 14:26:52 -0500 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]:14942 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753080AbZCFT0v (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2009 14:26:51 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=JxlK+ue3GaU8gu5ZJ3mkKw/zVfBCvcZXB2KOlIC1TxgueT0QKCGeAWUsxvQt6Fiq7V 1V0zVTZGwimlqJt09xKrbTpGrfaXcz1evMAM/GKtj+9T4o/AZhCGlNHLTJSKuyGsqWD5 75O6OexTay+xBbOEu9R+/pnuy8PJEA/qyuAqc= Subject: Re: usb/host/pci-quirks: Add option for setting handoff timeout for ehci From: Martin Bammer To: Greg KH Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20090306175036.GC3099@kroah.com> References: <1236340355.16732.23.camel@localhost> <20090306175036.GC3099@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:26:45 +0100 Message-Id: <1236367605.16732.47.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Yes right. It fails faster, because the bios doesn't handoff the device. But it's no help for the user that he always has to wait 8s because of a buggy bios. Although the handoff fails the usb-controller works without any problems. > > When having a buggy BIOS which doesn't do ehci handoff correctly a 8s > > boot delay is the result. This patch adds a kernel command line > > parameter ehci_ho_to to be able to set an arbitrary timeout. On my > > netbook I've set it to 50 which works without any problems. Maybe the > > patch would be interesting for others? > > I don't see how this makes anything go faster, you are just changing the > timeout value, which should only make things fail faster, not succeed > faster :) > > thanks, > > greg k-h