--ibTvN161/egqYuK8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline


--ibTvN161/egqYuK8
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

	by antiright.dyndns.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k4860HeW003063
	for <jefbed@localhost>; Mon, 8 May 2006 02:01:35 -0400 (EDT)
	by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-6.2.5.5)
	for jefbed@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 08 May 2006 02:01:35 -0400 (EDT)
        Mon, 8 May 2006 00:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
        Mon, 08 May 2006 00:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
        by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id d13si1443458pyd.2006.05.08.00.53.54;
        Mon, 08 May 2006 00:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (gmail.com: best guess record for domain of bounces-tech-kern-owner-antiright=gmail.com@netbsd.org designates 204.152.190.11 as permitted sender)
	id 0050B63B131; Mon,  8 May 2006 03:53:15 -0400 (EDT)
	by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F9E963B130
	for <tech-kern@netbsd.org>; Mon,  8 May 2006 03:53:12 -0400 (EDT)
	by antiright.dyndns.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k482XOQ4008559;
	Sun, 7 May 2006 22:33:25 -0400 (EDT)
	by antiright.dyndns.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.3) id k482XNBn023352;
	Sun, 7 May 2006 22:33:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: antiright@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 22:33:23 -0400
To: tech-kern@netbsd.org
Cc: jefbed@netbsd.org
Subject: Re: uvisor driver support for Palm z22
Message-ID: <20060508023321.GA7387@antiright.dyndns.org>
Mail-Followup-To: jefbed@netbsd.org, tech-kern@netbsd.org,
	jefbed@netbsd.org
References: <20060424191549.GA475@antiright.dyndns.org> <20060427164813.GH7993@netbsd.org> <20060503172158.GA7576@antiright.dyndns.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060503172158.GA7576@antiright.dyndns.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Sender: tech-kern-owner@netbsd.org

On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 01:22:00PM -0400, antiright@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 09:48:13AM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be better to increase the timeout time?
> > 
> > Either there is a longer, more-correct timeout that will work, or we're 
> > doing something wrong in the probe which results in the z22 not 
> > responding.
> 
> I will look for a more effective solution following your suggestion.
> My patch works, but it is obviously a hack, in that it does not directly
> address the cause of the problem, but rather prevents the timeout error
> from being issued.
> 

I have tried adjusting the timeout period (as defined in usbdi.h).
The same TIMEOUT error occurrs, regardless of the time used.
So, I would suspect the latter option mentioned, of something being wrong
with the probe, to be the case.  I think that the best solution would
be to isolate the error-checking code causing the false positive for a
TIMEOUT, and simply scrap it.  (I've also had better results with the
timeout period *reduced*, since ucom is only attached after the period
has passed.)

Jeff




--ibTvN161/egqYuK8--