Messages in this thread | | | From | Mariusz Kozlowski <> | Subject | Re: [linux-usb-devel] [usb-storage] schedule_timeout: wrong timeout value c1a95554 | Date | Thu, 9 Aug 2007 17:20:01 +0200 |
| |
> > > Happens every time I reattach usb pen drive. > > > > > > usb 1-2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 10 > > > usb 1-2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice > > > scsi6 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices > > > usb 1-2: new device found, idVendor=13fe, idProduct=1a00 > > > usb 1-2: new device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0 > > > usb 1-2: Product: GEIL USB DISK > > > usb 1-2: Manufacturer: > > > usb-storage: device found at 10 > > > usb-storage: waiting for device to settle before scanning > > > schedule_timeout: wrong timeout value c1a95554 > > > [<c010456a>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x30 > > > [<c010508d>] show_trace+0x12/0x14 > > > [<c01051e0>] dump_stack+0x15/0x17 > > > [<c04174d1>] schedule_timeout+0x8c/0xa2 > > > [<c032aeec>] usb_stor_scan_thread+0x100/0x160 > > > [<c0127f2e>] kthread+0x36/0x58 > > > [<c0104233>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x14 > > > ======================= > > > scsi 6:0:0:0: Direct-Access GEIL USB DISK >2.0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0 CCS > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] 1007616 512-byte hardware sectors (516 MB) > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 23 00 00 00 > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] Assuming drive cache: write through > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] 1007616 512-byte hardware sectors (516 MB) > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 23 00 00 00 > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] Assuming drive cache: write through > > > sda: sda1 > > > sd 6:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI removable disk > > > sd 6:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0 > > > usb-storage: device scan complete > > > > This is a known problem. See > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=118641424414399&w=2 > > > > Rafael, has this been fixed yet? > > No, I wasn't aware of it. > > I think that something like the appended patch is necessary. > > Mariusz, please see if that helps.
Yes - this patch fixes the bug.
Thanks,
Mariusz
> --- > include/linux/freezer.h | 18 +++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > Index: linux-2.6.23-rc2/include/linux/freezer.h > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.23-rc2.orig/include/linux/freezer.h > +++ linux-2.6.23-rc2/include/linux/freezer.h > @@ -134,28 +134,28 @@ static inline void set_freezable(void) > > #define wait_event_freezable(wq, condition) \ > ({ \ > - int __ret; \ > + int __retval; \ > do { \ > - __ret = wait_event_interruptible(wq, \ > + __retval = wait_event_interruptible(wq, \ > (condition) || freezing(current)); \ > - if (__ret && !freezing(current)) \ > + if (__retval && !freezing(current)) \ > break; \ > else if (!(condition)) \ > - __ret = -ERESTARTSYS; \ > + __retval = -ERESTARTSYS; \ > } while (try_to_freeze()); \ > - __ret; \ > + __retval; \ > }) > > > #define wait_event_freezable_timeout(wq, condition, timeout) \ > ({ \ > - long __ret = timeout; \ > + long __retval = timeout; \ > do { \ > - __ret = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(wq, \ > + __retval = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(wq, \ > (condition) || freezing(current), \ > - __ret); \ > + __retval); \ > } while (try_to_freeze()); \ > - __ret; \ > + __retval; \ > }) > #else /* !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP */ > static inline int frozen(struct task_struct *p) { return 0; } > - 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/
| |