Hi,
I have suddenly no working usb anymore. It worked perfect with 2.5.68
(And all earlier 2.5.x I have tried (which are most of them)). I get
this in the log:
drivers/usb/core/usb.c: registered new driver usbfs
drivers/usb/core/usb.c: registered new driver hub
drivers/usb/host/uhci-hcd.c: USB Universal Host Controller Interface
driver v2.0
uhci-hcd 00:11.2: VIA Technologies, In USB
uhci-hcd 00:11.2: irq 19, io base 00009800
Please use the 'usbfs' filetype instead, the 'usbdevfs' name is
deprecated.
uhci-hcd 00:11.2: new USB bus registered, assigned bus number 1
hub 1-0:0: USB hub found
hub 1-0:0: 2 ports detected
uhci-hcd 00:11.3: VIA Technologies, In USB (#2)
uhci-hcd 00:11.3: irq 19, io base 00009400
uhci-hcd 00:11.3: new USB bus registered, assigned bus number 2
hub 2-0:0: USB hub found
hub 2-0:0: 2 ports detected
uhci-hcd 00:11.4: VIA Technologies, In USB (#3)
uhci-hcd 00:11.4: irq 19, io base 00009000
uhci-hcd 00:11.4: new USB bus registered, assigned bus number 3
hub 3-0:0: USB hub found
hub 3-0:0: 2 ports detected
hub 1-0:0: debounce: port 1: delay 100ms stable 4 status 0x101
hub 1-0:0: new USB device on port 1, assigned address 2
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
drivers/usb/core/usb.c: registered new driver usblp
drivers/usb/class/usblp.c: v0.13: USB Printer Device Class driver
drivers/usb/core/usb.c: registered new driver usbscanner
drivers/usb/image/scanner.c: 0.4.11:USB Scanner Driver
usb 1-1: USB device not accepting new address=2 (error=-110)
hub 1-0:0: new USB device on port 1, assigned address 3
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
Bluetooth: HCI USB driver ver 2.4
drivers/usb/core/usb.c: registered new driver hci_usb
usb 1-1: USB device not accepting new address=3 (error=-110)
hub 3-0:0: debounce: port 1: delay 100ms stable 4 status 0x101
hub 3-0:0: new USB device on port 1, assigned address 2
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
usb 3-1: USB device not accepting new address=2 (error=-110)
hub 3-0:0: new USB device on port 1, assigned address 3
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
usb 3-1: USB device not accepting new address=3 (error=-110)
hub 3-0:0: debounce: port 2: delay 100ms stable 4 status 0x101
hub 3-0:0: new USB device on port 2, assigned address 4
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
usb 3-2: USB device not accepting new address=4 (error=-110)
hub 3-0:0: new USB device on port 2, assigned address 5
drivers/usb/core/message.c: usb_control/bulk_msg: timeout
usb 3-2: USB device not accepting new address=5 (error=-110)
(Here I first load uhci-hcd, usblp (but the printer wasn't connected :P
), scanner and usb-hci. The thirs usb device connected is a pl2303
serial converter. Didn't load that driver.)
I have read somewhere that the USB device not accepting new address
means that the host-controller doesn't get an interrupt, and that this
often is because of ACPI. It's just the same with acpi disabled (and in
2.5.68 it did work with and without acpi).
Do you need any more info, or am I just doing something really, really
stupid?
Thanks.
Best regards,
Stian
On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 10:54:20PM +0200, Stian Jordet wrote:
>
> I have read somewhere that the USB device not accepting new address
> means that the host-controller doesn't get an interrupt, and that this
> often is because of ACPI. It's just the same with acpi disabled (and in
> 2.5.68 it did work with and without acpi).
Hm, can you look at /proc/interrups and verify that the usb controller's
interrupt count is going up? It really sounds like the interrupt isn't
getting through to the usb controller driver.
thanks,
greg k-h
man, 05.05.2003 kl. 23.51 skrev Greg KH:
> On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 10:54:20PM +0200, Stian Jordet wrote:
> >
> > I have read somewhere that the USB device not accepting new address
> > means that the host-controller doesn't get an interrupt, and that this
> > often is because of ACPI. It's just the same with acpi disabled (and in
> > 2.5.68 it did work with and without acpi).
>
> Hm, can you look at /proc/interrups and verify that the usb controller's
> interrupt count is going up? It really sounds like the interrupt isn't
> getting through to the usb controller driver.
*argh* I hate this. Earlier I only tried to disable acpi, I had to
disable MPS1.4 in the BIOS as well. Now it works. But, I can't turn my
computer off without acpi. This worked with 2.5.68, so something has
changed, but I guess you aren't the one to blame, then.
Thanks for answering, and sorry I didn't find this out earlier. But it
works with acpi in 2.5.68, that's what's bugging me :)
Best regards,
Stian
A little off-topic rant about my motherboard:
I have a ASUS CUV266-DLS motherboard. Dual P3, integrated SCSI and
ethernet. Since it is smp, I have to use ACPI to power it off.
* With kernel 2.5.69, and ACPI enabled, usb doesn't work.
* With earlier ACPI enabled kernels, and secondary ide disabled in bios,
usb doesn't work.
* Without ACPI, no kernel will boot with secondary ide enabled.
It's not easy..
From: Stian Jordet <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, May 06, 2003 at 01:07:02AM +0200
> A little off-topic rant about my motherboard:
>
> I have a ASUS CUV266-DLS motherboard. Dual P3, integrated SCSI and
> ethernet. Since it is smp, I have to use ACPI to power it off.
>
try
apm=power-off
on the kernel command line.
HTH,
Jurriaan
--
MSDOS didn't get as bad as it is overnight -- it took over ten years
of careful development.
[email protected]
Debian (Unstable) GNU/Linux 2.5.69 4112 bogomips load av: 0.19 0.43 0.37
tir, 06.05.2003 kl. 06.56 skrev Jurriaan:
> From: Stian Jordet <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, May 06, 2003 at 01:07:02AM +0200
> > A little off-topic rant about my motherboard:
> >
> > I have a ASUS CUV266-DLS motherboard. Dual P3, integrated SCSI and
> > ethernet. Since it is smp, I have to use ACPI to power it off.
> >
>
> try
>
> apm=power-off
>
> on the kernel command line.
Thanks, I am aware of this, and I'm using it on several 2.4.x machines.
But I can't seem to get it to work on 2.5, something always segfaults
when it should turn off. But that might improve before 2.6.0. Anyway,
thanks a lot :)
Best regards,
Stian