Re: usb broken in 2.5?

Re: usb broken in 2.5?

[Adam J. Richter]

Greg KH wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 03:44:35AM +0100, Felix von Leitner wrote:
>> In 2.5.57 USB does not work. [...]

>This sounds like the old iterrupt routing problem that ACPI causes at
>times, and not a USB problem (the interrupts aren't getting to the
>controller, nothing the USB controller can do about that...)

	In case it helps you to know this, I'm looking into a similar
problem in 2.5.57-58 which may be related to what you (Felix) are
reporting.

	For some reason that I haven't figured out, USB keyboard and
mouse that are recognized in 2.5.56 are not recognized by 2.5.57 or
2.5.58, even though lsusb sees them.  This is the case on the two
different systems that I tried (with a different keyboard and
a different mouse).

	There were no changes to drivers/acpi between 2.5.56 and
2.5.57, and booting with acpi=off does not eliminate this problem.
There were few changes to usb between 2.5.56 and 2.5.57.  So, I
suspect that USB no longer working is a side-effect of some other
change.

Adam J. Richter     __     ______________   575 Oroville Road
adam@yggdrasil.com     \ /                  Milpitas, California 95035
+1 408 309-6081         | g g d r a s i l   United States of America
                         "Free Software For The Rest Of Us."

Re: usb broken in 2.5?

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 03:44:35AM +0100, Felix von Leitner wrote:
> In 2.5.57 USB does not work.  The mainboard devices are still detected,
> and apparently also the USB devices are found, but then the USB code
> tries to remap them and fails.  It tries again with 1.5 Mb/s and fails
> again.

This sounds like the old iterrupt routing problem that ACPI causes at
times, and not a USB problem (the interrupts aren't getting to the
controller, nothing the USB controller can do about that...)

> > usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
> > usb.c: USB device not accepting new address=3 (error=-110)
> 
> The same problem also happens with the WOLK kernel patch, which appears
> to also include a newer version of the USB code.

Newer version?  Where would the WOLK people get that from, as the stuff
in the main tree is the newest.

Since you said you are using ACPI, I'd suggest taking this up with the
ACPI developers.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: usb broken in 2.5?

[Felix von Leitner]

Thus spake Felix von Leitner (felix-linuxkernel@fefe.de):
> In 2.5.57 USB does not work.

[...]

> Any ideas?  On 2.5 and WOLK the kernel also says that no IRQ is know and
> that it is using ACPI to route the IRQs.

It turned out to be an ACPI issue.

Darn.  Not AGAIN!
ACPI is the biggest pile of crap to poison this earth.
I have yet to see it "just work".

I'll turn it off for good now, sorry for wasting your time with this.

usb broken in 2.5?

[Felix von Leitner]

In 2.5.57 USB does not work.  The mainboard devices are still detected,
and apparently also the USB devices are found, but then the USB code
tries to remap them and fails.  It tries again with 1.5 Mb/s and fails
again.

> usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
> usb.c: USB device not accepting new address=3 (error=-110)

The same problem also happens with the WOLK kernel patch, which appears
to also include a newer version of the USB code.

This is an excerpt from /proc/pci:

  Bus  0, device  16, function  0:
    USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 128).
      IRQ 21.
      Master Capable.  Latency=32.
      I/O at 0xdc00 [0xdc1f].
  Bus  0, device  16, function  1:
    USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (#2) (rev 128).
      IRQ 21.
      Master Capable.  Latency=32.
      I/O at 0xe000 [0xe01f].
  Bus  0, device  16, function  2:
    USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (#3) (rev 128).
      IRQ 21.
      Master Capable.  Latency=32.
      I/O at 0xe400 [0xe41f].
  Bus  0, device  16, function  3:
    USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB 2.0 (rev 130).
      IRQ 19.
      Master Capable.  Latency=32.
      Non-prefetchable 32 bit memory at 0xe6033000 [0xe60330ff].

Any ideas?  On 2.5 and WOLK the kernel also says that no IRQ is know and
that it is using ACPI to route the IRQs.

Felix