----- Original Message ----- > CAI, what kernel is this based off of? It looks like a backport to > 2.6.32? Sarah, yes, it is based on a 2.6.32-based kernel. As I mentioned early, this usb3 hub hibernate/resume problem can be also reproduced on your tree's hubs-v3-rebase branch. However, it is not possible to reproduce this on both Greg's usb tree and Linus' tree due to be marked by a general hibernate/resume regression, http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=130215842223224&w=2 Hence, it was a challenge to test Andiry's 5 patches due to not applied cleanly on the top of your hubs-v3-rebase branch. > You don't seem to have the USB 3.0 split roothub patches that went > with > the USB 3.0 hub support. The complete patchset is necessary for USB > 3.0 > hubs to work, and for power management to work. I have no idea how the > system is going to behave if you don't have the full patchset. Here's > the link to the full patchset, if you need it: > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=130007599330834&w=2 That patchset is too big for me to apply on the top of my 2.6.32-based kernel. Do you have any suggestion to test this on the top of hubs-v3-rebase branch? Maybe I just need to track down the genenral hibernate/resume regression first, and then to test this again. > I only see one xHCI host controller roothub (device 8-1) in your lsusb > output, but I should see two xHCI roothubs (one USB 2.0 and one USB > 3.0 > roothub). So either the split roothub code isn't working properly, or > you didn't take the whole patchset. I can't tell what happened from > the > dmesg because you didn't capture from the beginning of boot (or when > you > loaded the xHCI driver). The dmesg captured from the boot was uploaded here, http://people.redhat.com/qcai/dmesg-2 CAI Qian -- 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
