Hi all :)
I have a Lexmark E312 laser printer, which comes with both a parallel
port and an USB port. It interprets PostScript, so when I print I
simply 'cat' the file to the printer device (together with some
codes, quite simple). This method works smoothly when using the
printer through the parallel port, no problem, but when I use the USB
port, sometimes I get the following:
kernel: host/usb-uhci.c: interrupt, status 2, frame# 682
kernel: printer.c: usblp0: nonzero read/write bulk status received: -110
kernel: printer.c: usblp0: error -84 reading printer status
kernel: printer.c: usblp0: removed
I have shown one of each error messages I get in my system logs.
Normally I get a couple or three of the first message, a few of the
last and a good bunch of the another two. Whenever I get the message
about the 'bulk status', the printer dies and I must turn cycle it.
I'm using kernel 2.4.21, if this matters...
Since the parallel port works OK, I know the printer works. So
the culprit must be:
- The USB interface of the printer. Not likely, but...
- The driver for usblp0
- The driver for USB uhci
- Me (most likely)
Is that a symptom of misconfiguration? Must I do anything more
than a simple cat for printing trhu USB)? Can I tune anything for
getting better timing or the like (if it is a timing problem, of
course...)? I thought that the printer was broken, but when I tested
printing through the parallel port and it worked...
Thanks in advance, and sorry if this is documented, I haven't
found any information about this :(
Ra?l N??ez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736
http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/
On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 08:24:30PM +0100, DervishD wrote:
> Hi all :)
>
> I have a Lexmark E312 laser printer, which comes with both a parallel
> port and an USB port. It interprets PostScript, so when I print I
> simply 'cat' the file to the printer device (together with some
> codes, quite simple). This method works smoothly when using the
> printer through the parallel port, no problem, but when I use the USB
> port, sometimes I get the following:
>
> kernel: host/usb-uhci.c: interrupt, status 2, frame# 682
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: nonzero read/write bulk status received: -110
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: error -84 reading printer status
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: removed
I'm getting this same error when printing anything but the smallest
print job to an HP DeskJet 3550 USB. Using latest RH9 errata packages.
> I have shown one of each error messages I get in my system logs.
> Normally I get a couple or three of the first message, a few of the
> last and a good bunch of the another two. Whenever I get the message
> about the 'bulk status', the printer dies and I must turn cycle it.
>
I also have to power cycle the printer to get it to do anything again.
mh
--
Martin Hicks || [email protected] || PGP/GnuPG: 0x4C7F2BEE
On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 08:24:30PM +0100, DervishD wrote:
> Hi all :)
>
> I have a Lexmark E312 laser printer, which comes with both a parallel
> port and an USB port. It interprets PostScript, so when I print I
> simply 'cat' the file to the printer device (together with some
> codes, quite simple). This method works smoothly when using the
> printer through the parallel port, no problem, but when I use the USB
> port, sometimes I get the following:
>
> kernel: host/usb-uhci.c: interrupt, status 2, frame# 682
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: nonzero read/write bulk status received: -110
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: error -84 reading printer status
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: removed
>
> I have shown one of each error messages I get in my system logs.
> Normally I get a couple or three of the first message, a few of the
> last and a good bunch of the another two. Whenever I get the message
> about the 'bulk status', the printer dies and I must turn cycle it.
>
> I'm using kernel 2.4.21, if this matters...
It does. I'd recommend trying 2.4.23-pre3, as it had a usb printer
driver update in it.
Or 2.6.0, that also should be better.
Good luck,
greg k-h
On Monday 05 Jan 2004 7:24 pm, DervishD wrote:
>
> kernel: host/usb-uhci.c: interrupt, status 2, frame# 682
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: nonzero read/write bulk status received: -110
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: error -84 reading printer status
> kernel: printer.c: usblp0: removed
>
I had very similar messages (from memory), tried all sorts of different kernel
versions, options, usb patches.... I even exchanged the usb cable. After a
week I was ready to throw the **** printer out the window, when by chance I
tried a shorter usb cable and it's worked perfectly ever since. I know it
sounds unlikely (all the cables were within the 10ft allowed for usb1), but
it worked for me. Might be worth a try.
Andrew Walrond
Hi Greg :)
* Greg KH <[email protected]> dixit:
> > I'm using kernel 2.4.21, if this matters...
> It does. I'd recommend trying 2.4.23-pre3, as it had a usb printer
> driver update in it.
I'll give it a try. I can use the printer thru the parallel port
anyway, so this is a minor problem. Just annoying.
> Or 2.6.0, that also should be better.
Not for now, I don't want to upgrade the module utilities yet. I
have to upgrade my libc first. Long story...
Thanks a lot for your answer, Greg :)
Ra?l N??ez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736
http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/
Hi Martin :)
* Martin Hicks <[email protected]> dixit:
> > kernel: host/usb-uhci.c: interrupt, status 2, frame# 682
> > kernel: printer.c: usblp0: nonzero read/write bulk status received: -110
> > kernel: printer.c: usblp0: error -84 reading printer status
> > kernel: printer.c: usblp0: removed
> I'm getting this same error when printing anything but the smallest
> print job to an HP DeskJet 3550 USB. Using latest RH9 errata packages.
Exactly, I have this problem when printing anything large :((
Under Windows is worse, the printer doesn't work at all thru USB...
At least under Linux I can print, with some problems, but I can.
Thanks for the support :)
Ra?l N??ez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736
http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/
Hi Andrew :)
* Andrew Walrond <[email protected]> dixit:
> tried a shorter usb cable and it's worked perfectly ever since. I
> know it sounds unlikely (all the cables were within the 10ft
> allowed for usb1), but it worked for me. Might be worth a try.
The cable is OK, I've tested with two cables and with a USB
memory stick and all works ok. Seems like the printer doesn't like to
have both the parallel cable and the USB cable plugged at the same
time, but sometimes it worked, so... The final cause seems to be the
size of the file I want to print. The larger, the more chances to
fail. I'll try a new cable tomorrow, probably, but I'll give a newer
kernel a try.
Thanks :)
Ra?l N??ez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736
http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/
On Monday 05 Jan 2004 8:29 pm, DervishD wrote:
>
> The cable is OK, I've tested with two cables and with a USB
> memory stick and all works ok. Seems like the printer doesn't like to
> have both the parallel cable and the USB cable plugged at the same
> time, but sometimes it worked, so... The final cause seems to be the
> size of the file I want to print. The larger, the more chances to
> fail. I'll try a new cable tomorrow, probably, but I'll give a newer
> kernel a try.
>
Well yes; both cables I tried worked fine with other devices, but with the
printer (Laserjet 2400) the attenuation was obviously too much. With a 4ft
cable, everything works fine.
Same error messages, and same symtoms, in that the bigger the file, the more
likely the problem was to occur. Once the error had happened, the printer
needed to be power-cycled before more prints would work.
I spent a week before xmas trying all latest kernels and Gregs latest usb
patches, to no avail.
Let me know how it turns out :)
Andrew Walrond
Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 08:24:30PM +0100, DervishD wrote:
>
>> ....
>> I'm using kernel 2.4.21, if this matters...
>>
>
> It does. I'd recommend trying 2.4.23-pre3, as it had a usb printer
> driver update in it.
>
> Or 2.6.0, that also should be better.
I submitted a patch against kernel 2.6.0 to correct a bug in the usblp write
function. It is probably not related to your problem, but if using a 2.6.0
kernel doesn't solve your problem, you can try it anyway to see if it helps.
--
Paulo Marques - http://www.grupopie.com
"In a world without walls and fences who needs windows and gates?"
In rhat.general.linux-kernel, Martin Hicks <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 08:24:30PM +0100, DervishD wrote:
> I'm getting this same error when printing anything but the smallest
> print job to an HP DeskJet 3550 USB. Using latest RH9 errata packages.
Please never use the phrase "Using latest ... errata" again.
NEVER. How am I supposed to know what kernel you are using?!
Instead, write "Using 2.4.23-foo", or paste /proc/version.
And once we are at it, file a bug to RH Bugzilla. Or better yet,
upgrade to FC1 and file a bug.
-- Pete
Hi Paulo :)
* Paulo Marques <[email protected]> dixit:
> >> I'm using kernel 2.4.21, if this matters...
> >It does. I'd recommend trying 2.4.23-pre3, as it had a usb printer
> >driver update in it.
> >Or 2.6.0, that also should be better.
> I submitted a patch against kernel 2.6.0 to correct a bug in the usblp
> write function. It is probably not related to your problem, but if using a
> 2.6.0 kernel doesn't solve your problem, you can try it anyway to see if it
> helps.
I don't plan using 2.6.0 by now, but if I can, I'll test and tell
here the results. First I want to check with a shorter USB cable.
Thanks a lot for your help :)
Ra?l N??ez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736
http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/
Hi Andrew :)
* Andrew Walrond <[email protected]> dixit:
> > size of the file I want to print. The larger, the more chances to
> > fail. I'll try a new cable tomorrow, probably, but I'll give a newer
> > kernel a try.
> Well yes; both cables I tried worked fine with other devices, but with the
> printer (Laserjet 2400) the attenuation was obviously too much. With a 4ft
> cable, everything works fine.
Didn't thought about attenuation :(( My cable is almost 5ft (1.5
metres more or less), and maybe is too long for the printer :??
> Let me know how it turns out :)
By now I'm using the parallel interface, and I won't use USB
again until I get a new cable and test the latest stable 2.4.x If I
get this to work I'll tell here.
Thanks :)
Ra?l N??ez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736
http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/