From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764800AbXHNGoa (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 02:44:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752590AbXHNGoR (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 02:44:17 -0400 Received: from server009.webpack.hosteurope.de ([80.237.130.17]:39624 "EHLO server009.webpack.hosteurope.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751917AbXHNGoP convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 02:44:15 -0400 From: Daniel Exner Reply-To: webmaster@dragonslave.de To: David Brownell Subject: Re: EHCI Regression in 2.6.23-rc2 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:43:41 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 Cc: Stuart_Hayes@dell.com, greg@kroah.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, jikos@jikos.cz References: <200708101045.57166.dex@dragonslave.de> <200708131516.18675.david-b@pacbell.net> In-Reply-To: <200708131516.18675.david-b@pacbell.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200708140843.42196.webmaster@dragonslave.de> X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;webmaster@dragonslave.de;1187073855;8503a017; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David Brownell wrote: > On Monday 13 August 2007, Stuart_Hayes@dell.com wrote: > > With the VIA controller I have, > > Which kind is that? The VT6202 is buggy as all get-out, and > they sold a *LOT* of those discrete chips for use in add-on PCI > cards. We generally warn people away from those. A more current > version is the VT6212, which was much more usable. (If it says > EHCI 0.95, it's a VT6202... their EHCI 1.0 chips were much better.) Where exactly should I search for this? Neither lspci nor lsusb showed any hint on the EHCI rev. the chip conforms to.. [..] > > Perhaps for now the best thing would just be to bypass the EHCI CPU > > frequency notifier code (i.e., my patch) for VIA EHCI controllers, since > > they are broken.  Would a hard-coded blacklist (just an "if > > (manufacturer==VIA)..." type thing) be OK? > > Yes ... although if you don't need to blacklist their EHCI 1.0 chips > don't do it. (Any VIA EHCI integrated into a southbridge is going > to follow spec rev 1.0 pretty well, modulo idiosyncratic timings.) I guess its needed to blacklist even the ECHI 1.0 chips, since my problem is with exactly one of those ;) I'm not really into USB protocol specs, but perhaps its possible to test wether the problem Stuarts patch addressed can actually happen on VIA EHCI chips? Perhaps those guys solved the problem in Hard/Firmware.. > > I've also acquired a card with an NEC EHCI controller on it, which I'm > > going to look at while I'm into it... > > Another case where there are a lot of add-on "EHCI 0.95" cards; but > in this case the quirks were less significant. Some guy donated me a PCMCIA card with one of those, cause it'll wont work in his Windows only Notebook :) Greetings Daniel Exner