On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 09:53:19PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Sat, 3 Sep 2005, Jan De Luyck wrote: > > > I've posted in the past about problems with these enclosures - increasing the > > delay seems to fix it, albeit temporarily. The further you go in using the > > disk in such an enclosure, the higher the udelay() had to be - atleast that's > > what I'm seeing here (I've got two of these now :/ ) > > > > One permanent fix is adding a powered USB-hub in between the drive enclosures > > and the computer. Since I've done that, I've no longer seen any of the > > problems (i've attached the 'fault' log). Weird but true, since the drives > > come with their own powersupply. > > > > Hope this helps anyone in the future running into the same problem. > > This one certainly goes into the Bizarro file. > > Just out of curiosity -- when you use the powered hub, does the drive work > even if you remove that delay completely? Aren't USB 2.0 hubs more "intelligent" as part of the requirement to support 1.1 and 2.0 devices? I wonder if it's really a 2.0 drive, and if the timing is different enough with the hub to make a difference. Matt -- Matthew Dharm Home: [email protected] Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver THEY CASTRATED MY QUAKE BITS! I WANT THEM BACK!!!! -- Greg User Friendly, 3/27/1998
Attachment:
pgpvqiCkzIC3R.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [linux-usb-devel] Genesys USB 2.0 enclosures
- From: Grant Coady <[email protected]>
- Re: [linux-usb-devel] Genesys USB 2.0 enclosures
- References:
- Re: [linux-usb-devel] Genesys USB 2.0 enclosures
- From: Alan Stern <[email protected]>
- Re: [linux-usb-devel] Genesys USB 2.0 enclosures
- Prev by Date: Re: nfs4 client bug
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dynticks - implement no idle hz for x86
- Previous by thread: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Genesys USB 2.0 enclosures
- Next by thread: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Genesys USB 2.0 enclosures
- Index(es):