Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Feb 2008 15:35:45 -0500 | From | Andrew Buehler <> | Subject | Re: USB regression (and other failures) in 2.6.2[45]* - mostly resolved |
| |
On 2/16/2008 10:35 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Andrew Buehler wrote:
>> Until this thread, I was not even aware that ACPI was related to >> USB; I had largely conflated it with a similar acronym which I >> think is related to power management and which I can suddenly not >> even find in my kernel config. I will, however, look into >> linux-acpi. > > ACPI isn't directly related to USB; rather it has to do with > transferring information between the OS and the > BIOS/vendor-specific-hardware. Power management is example where such > a transfer is needed. In your case, the relevant information is > which IRQ is connected to which motherboard device. If you don't have > ACPI enabled in your configuration, then perhaps that's the problem > -- try enabling it.
Apparently it was the problem; enabling ACPI has fixed not only the USB problem but also the network problem (somewhat miraculously, since I'm quite certain that I had ACPI enabled in a 2.6.23.x kernel where the network did not work despite an apparently matching driver).
I feel somewhat foolish for having reported a regression over what turns out to have been a simple misconfiguration, but I still do think it's somewhat misleading at best for something so potentially important to completely non-power-related things to be buried under the heading of power management... I would suggest moving it somewhere else in the config and the dependencies, except that I have neither a suggestion for a possible place nor any idea of how much actual work that would involve.
With those two problems out of the way, what is left is the hard-drive issue, and that is also halfway fixed by enabling ACPI. Specifically, it is "fixed" in that the kernel sees the hard drive and I can mount it, but it is not fixed in that the program we need to use in this environment does not see the drive.
I have a config from a boot disc running 2.6.5 (that's not a typo) under which the program in question *does* see the drive, but there are massive differences between that config and the one I am using now, and narrowing the critical difference down is likely to be somewhat difficult - particularly since some of the "differences" are merely renamed config symbols (i.e. the CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_*->CONFIG_SATA_* switchover), and I have limited ability to tell which without intensive investigation. Are there any established techniques for simplifying this kind of comparison?
-- Andrew Buehler
| |