Hi Arokux, Am 29.09.2013 23:16, schrieb Arokux X: > Hi Oleksij, > > On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 10:01 PM, Oleksij Rempel <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi Arokux, >> >> Allan already pointed on timing issue. If you compare bad and working >> logs you will see that interval on bad log is match more shorter. On my >> expiriance with other wifi adapter it is critical. Beside, it has >> nothing todo with wifi at all. >> In many cases usb controller insight of adapter is produced by some >> other company. For example faraday-tech which produce FUSB200, >> FUSB220,.. IP cores. >> >> If interval is less then hardware can handle, it can overfill FIFOs on >> endpoints. If firmware can't handle this error, then device will be just >> unresponsive. > > thanks for the explanation. The hardware is the same in both cases. So > the only difference is in software. What do you think can influence > such difference in timing on software side? Maybe some clock has > higher frequency then it should? Suddenly i do not know. USB is a new topic for me and my first and only experience is an usb related issue with atheros ar9271 and ar7010 adapters. Lucky me, i have access to firmware source and was able to get some more information about hardware. I still have no idea what actually happening on HC side. On your place i would start to search the change which caused this regression. It will mean, test your driver on different kernel versions. -- Regards, Oleksij -- 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
