On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 03:39:49PM +0200, oneukum@xxxxxxx wrote: > From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@xxxxxxx> > > Some laptops have an internal port for a BT device which picks > up noise when the kill switch is used, but not enough to trigger > printk_rlimit(). So we shouldn't log consecutive faults of this kind. > > Signed-off-by: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@xxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/usb/core/hub.c | 11 ++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c > index 21b99b4..27597da 100644 > --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c > +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c > @@ -4531,6 +4531,7 @@ static void hub_port_connect(struct usb_hub *hub, int port1, u16 portstatus, > struct usb_hcd *hcd = bus_to_hcd(hdev->bus); > struct usb_port *port_dev = hub->ports[port1 - 1]; > struct usb_device *udev = port_dev->child; > + static int unreliable_port = -1; > > /* Disconnect any existing devices under this port */ > if (udev) { > @@ -4551,10 +4552,14 @@ static void hub_port_connect(struct usb_hub *hub, int port1, u16 portstatus, > USB_PORT_STAT_C_ENABLE)) { > status = hub_port_debounce_be_stable(hub, port1); > if (status < 0) { > - if (status != -ENODEV && printk_ratelimit()) > - dev_err(&port_dev->dev, > - "connect-debounce failed\n"); > + if (status != -ENODEV && > + port1 != unreliable_port && > + printk_ratelimit()) > + dev_err(&udev->dev, "connect-debounce failed, port %d disabled\n", > + port1); > + > portstatus &= ~USB_PORT_STAT_CONNECTION; > + unreliable_port = port1; So if I have hubs with the same "broken" port, I'll only get one message? What if I have 2 "broken" ports, I'll keep getting the messages? I'm not suggesting that we have a "broken port" flag per port for each hub, but this really seems like it is just a half-fix for a specific piece of broken hardware :( thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html