[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Test Patch: 2.5.69 Interrupt Latency
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.


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 Fulghum,
Microgate Corporation,

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.098 / U:0.216 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site