From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264209AbTEOTuB (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2003 15:50:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264207AbTEOTuB (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2003 15:50:01 -0400 Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.103]:41461 "EHLO e3.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264196AbTEOTt6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2003 15:49:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 13:04:46 -0700 From: Greg KH To: David van Hoose Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: USB not accepting addresses in bk9 Message-ID: <20030515200446.GA10318@kroah.com> References: <3EC310C3.9060606@cox.net> <20030515070800.GA6497@kroah.com> <3EC3F02E.1010604@cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3EC3F02E.1010604@cox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 03:53:18PM -0400, David van Hoose wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > >On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 12:00:03AM -0400, David van Hoose wrote: > > > >>Sometime between 2.5.69-bk4 and 2.5.69-bk8, something with related to > >>the USB was messed up. I get the below lines in my dmesg. > >>hub 2-0:0: new USB device on port 1, assigned address 2 > >>usb 2-1: USB device not accepting new address=2 (error=-110) > >>hub 2-0:0: new USB device on port 1, assigned address 3 > >>usb 2-1: USB device not accepting new address=3 (error=-110) > >> > >>The first device is my Logitech Cordless Optical Trackball. > >>The second device is my TI USB Graphlink. > >> > >>The Trackball still works. Not sure about the graphlink as I don't have > >>the software installed yet. :-/ > > > >How can the device work if the USB bus rejected it? Also, does > >/proc/interrupts increment for the USB controller when you plug a device > >in? > > No idea. It seems to increment the usb line in /proc/interrupts. > I've attached a dmesg with verbose debugging. -ENOATTACHMENT :) > >>I used the same config for bk4 as I did for bk8. It've attached my > >>config for bk9 since it is the same anyway. > > > >Care to do a binary search of bk4 to bk8 to try to find the problem? > >Should only take you 2 reboots at most :) > > What do you want me to do? I don't know if I have the skills yet to code > for the kernel, so the least I can do is test it. :-) Ok, bk4 works for you and bk8 doesn't. So try the following: - test bk6 - if bk6 fails test bk5 - if bk5 fails, the problem happened between bk4 and bk5 - if bk5 works, the problem happened bewtwen bk5 and bk6 - if bk6 works test bk7 - if bk7 fails, the problem happened between bk6 and bk7 - if bk7 works, the problem happened between bk7 and bk8 And let us know what the result is, please. thanks, greg k-h