From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Frank Rowand Subject: Re: [BUG] bisected: PandaBoard smsc95xx ethernet driver error from USB timeout Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 13:32:31 -0700 Message-ID: <514B6E5F.2040405@am.sony.com> References: <514A7E81.9000501@am.sony.com> <514B6CAF.3090406@am.sony.com> Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ming Lei , "stern@rowland.harvard.edu" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "balbi@ti.com" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "steve.glendinning@smsc.com" To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input) Return-path: In-Reply-To: <514B6CAF.3090406@am.sony.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 03/21/13 13:25, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 03/21/13 02:00, Ming Lei wrote: < snip > > ---------- > There are some timeout messages that I am not positive are symptoms of > the problem. With these messages, the smsc95xx driver initialization is > successful, so the ethernet device is available. For the first bisect > attempt, I did not treat these messages as errors. For the second bisect > attempt I treated these messages as errors. A typical example of the > timeout message is: > > [ 9.537811] hub 1-1:1.0: state 7 ports 5 chg 0000 evt 0002 > [ 17.056701] usb 1-1.1: swapper/0 timed out on ep0out len=0/4 > [ 17.062652] smsc95xx 1-1.1:1.0: eth0: Failed to write register index 0x00000108 > [ 17.070343] smsc95xx 1-1.1:1.0: eth0: Failed to write ADDRL: -110 > [ 17.076751] IP-Config: Failed to open eth0 Oops, pasted the wrong example. This is an example of a timeout, but the driver still works, and the system boots: [ 6.072357] smsc95xx 1-1.1:1.0: eth0: register 'smsc95xx' at usb-ehci-omap.0-1.1, smsc95xx USB 2.0 Ethernet, fa:50:73:02:79:67 [ 6.084655] hub 1-1:1.0: state 7 ports 5 chg 0000 evt 0002 [ 11.220672] usb 1-1.1: swapper/0 timed out on ep0out len=4/4 [ 18.183441] usb 1-1.1: link qh8-0001/dc8d6640 start 2 [1/0 us] [ 19.822296] IP-Config: Complete: > > The mention of swapper is not relevent, it just happens to be the > current process when the time out occurs. > > I have only seen these timeout messages in the boot log, so they may not > be a very visible symptom. They also _might_ be unrelated to the problem, > but my gut feel is that they are related. < snip > -Frank