On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 11:40:52AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Dec 2019, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 02:33:01PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > >
> > > Let's try a slightly different approach. What happens with this patch?
> > >
> > > Alan Stern
> > >
> > >
> > > Index: usb-devel/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- usb-devel.orig/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> > > +++ usb-devel/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> > > @@ -1065,6 +1065,7 @@ static void hub_activate(struct usb_hub
> > > if (type == HUB_INIT) {
> > > delay = hub_power_on_good_delay(hub);
> > >
> > > + hub->power_bits[0] = ~0UL; /* All ports on */
> > > hub_power_on(hub, false);
> > > INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&hub->init_work, hub_init_func2);
> > > queue_delayed_work(system_power_efficient_wq,
> > >
> >
> > That doesn't make a difference - the traceback is still seen with this patch
> > applied.
>
> Can you trace what's going on? Does this code pathway now end up
> calling ehci_port_power() for each root-hub port, and from there down
> into the chipidea driver? If not, can you find where it gets
> sidetracked?
>
Sure, I'll do that. It will have to wait for the new year, though -
internet connectivity is terrible where I am right now,
Guenter
