Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Test Patch: 2.5.69 Interrupt Latency | From | Paul Fulghum <> | Date | 19 May 2003 13:20:14 -0500 |
| |
On Mon, 2003-05-19 at 11:41, Alan Stern wrote: > The patch below incorporates your suggested subroutine. That alone wasn't > enough to prevent the state from bouncing a few times when I powered my > USB device on or off, so the debounce code is in there too. This patch > behaves fine on my workstation, which has both ports connected. I'll try > it later on my laptop, which only has one port. > > In the end, I decided it was easiest and safest to follow your "don't > suspend if any ports are OC" scheme. We can try it the other way too if > you want. What do you think would happen if you were to try to put your > machine in an APM/ACPI "suspend" state? > > This is a cumulative patch, i.e., it applies to a virgin 2.5.69 source. > Let me know how it works for you.
Alan,
the patch applied cleanly and worked for me (prevented global suspension). Having the lengthy waits outside of the ISR is a definate plus, and the debounce makes sense.
My machine does not have APM/ACPI facilities so I can't test the suspend. It is getting pretty dated, but the economy dictates I live with it for a while longer :-)
Does you laptop use the PIIX4? If it does and uses only one port, I would be very interested to see if one port is continuously reporting OC (hardwired).
Thanks for the patch, Paul
-- Paul Fulghum, paulkf@microgate.com Microgate Corporation, http://www.microgate.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |