Colin Fletcher wrote: > ua-1000-ehci-oldsched.log is the result with CONFIG_USB_EHCI_TT_NEWSCHED > not set: the URBs still complete out-of-order. > > Out of curiousity, because I have a dual-core CPU, I also tried booting > the CONFIG_USB_EHCI_TT_NEWSCHED=y kernel with maxcpus=0 > (ua-1000-ehci-newsched-maxcpus-0.log) and maxcpus=1 > (ua-1000-ehci-newsched-maxcpus-1.log), to see what would happen. > > Curiously, maxcpus=0 shows the URBs completing in order, except that > submitting URB 20 is delayed until after 0-19 have completed. maxcpus=1 > has the URBs out-of-order. I don't know what to conclude from this; > maybe it makes some sense to you? With maxcpus=0, several URBs are completed out of order after timestamp 203.58, and they should not complete at that time but ten milliseconds later. As far as I can see, none of these changes make much of a difference. (The TT scheduler should affect only low or full speed transfers.) > Is there anything else you'd like me to try? Please change line 376 to printk(KERN_DEBUG "completed URB %d, status: %d, bytes: %u\n", err, urb->status, urb->iso_frame_desc[0].actual_length); and show the logs for both maxcpus=1 and multiple cores. Can you try this on any other computer? > Or anything else you might need to know about my system? Is this really an unpatched kernel.org kernel? What USB controller do you have (see lspci)? > Is there a more appropriate list for this, or are we still on-topic for LAU? I'm not sure if this is a problem with the EHCI driver or your USB controller, but both would be appropriate for the linux-usb list. Regards, Clemens _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
