From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Stuart_Hayes@Dell.com
Cc: david-b@pacbell.net, michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com,
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, gregkh@suse.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
dex@dragonslave.de
Subject: RE: [linux-usb-devel] [4/4] 2.6.23-rc3: known regressions
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:41:46 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0708221122180.30176@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DFEF91B22ED07447AB6AA4B237F913F9B18F2A@ausx3mpc125.aus.amer.dell.com>
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Stuart_Hayes@Dell.com wrote:
>
> If you were running 2.6.26-rc3, that's quite possibly because you didn't
> have the follow-up patch that fixed my original patch... it wasn't in
> 2.6.26-rc3
Well, I was running "current git", and it's never been there. So not just
a -rc3 issue.
> That could definitely cause mouse lock-ups. Sorry, that should have
> occurred to me yesterday when you mentioned the problem your kids were
> seeing, but it didn't for some reason.
Btw, could it have caused the USB stack to be *really* confused? Some of
those mouse lockups ended up also locking the machine hard (ie no ping, no
nothing), and I'm a bit worried that there was something else going on
too..
That said, if you can actually re-create the MMF problems, could you
please try the patch that Arjan suggested? Ie add a
/*
* Some broadcom chips are buggy and can't take more than 5 usec as DMA
* latency; inform the rest of kernel of this.
*/
if (weird_broadcom_chip())
set_acceptable_latency("ehci", 5);
to the USB driver, and then add something like
static inline int cpufreq_acceptable_latency(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
unsigned long latency;
/* Policy latency in usec */
latency = policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency / 1000;
if (latency > system_latency_constraint())
return -EINVAL;
return 0;
}
adn then add calls to this from both the "__cpufreq_set_policy()" function
and the "__cpufreq_driver_target()" one too..
That should disable cpufreq with that broken chip, which is perhaps a big
draconian, but it's certainly better than having the USB layer know about
cpufreq internals directly.
In the longer run, I think we can move the "system_latency_constraint()"
checking from the policy registration into each CPU frequency driver, so
that it could be more dynamically decide about "can we do it right _now_"
rather than globally saying "we can't do it with this hardware".
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-22 18:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <46C098FD.1030601@googlemail.com>
2007-08-13 17:59 ` [2/4] " Michal Piotrowski
2007-08-13 23:29 ` Luca Tettamanti
2007-08-14 6:37 ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-08-13 17:59 ` [3/4] " Michal Piotrowski
2007-08-14 22:09 ` Francois Romieu
2007-08-13 17:59 ` [4/4] " Michal Piotrowski
2007-08-21 1:41 ` [linux-usb-devel] " David Brownell
2007-08-21 2:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 4:02 ` David Brownell
2007-08-21 4:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 4:48 ` David Brownell
2007-08-21 5:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 5:51 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-08-21 6:04 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-08-21 6:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 6:28 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-08-21 6:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 6:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 6:24 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-08-21 6:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 6:34 ` David Brownell
2007-08-21 6:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 7:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-22 3:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-22 14:42 ` Stuart_Hayes
2007-08-22 18:41 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-08-22 20:41 ` Stuart_Hayes
2007-08-22 23:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-08-21 4:27 ` [linux-usb-devel] " David Brownell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.0.999.0708221122180.30176@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Stuart_Hayes@Dell.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=dex@dragonslave.de \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®