Bug 102329

Summary:	iPod shuffle not recognized on nForce4 and NEC USB 2.0
Product:	[openSUSE] SUSE LINUX 10.0	Reporter:	Thomas Siedentopf <thomas.siedentopf>
Component:	Kernel	Assignee:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:	E-mail List <qa-bugs>
Severity:	Normal
Priority:	P5 - None
Version:	Preview 4
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	x86-64
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
Found By:	Other	Services Priority:
Business Priority:		Blocker:	---
Marketing QA Status:	---	IT Deployment:	---
Attachments:	dmesg output of g164 while a iPod shuffle is attached dmesg of tsieden's home sytem hwinfo of tsieden's home system /var/log/messages with kerneloops and sysrq-[PTM] hwinfo of affected system

Description Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-05 09:53:23 UTC

The iPod shuffle which is technically a USB 2.0 capable usb-storage device (like
any other SUB stick) is not recognized on the following USB 2.0 controllers:

- nVidia nForce 4 (nVidia Corporation CK804 USB Controller)
- NEC USB 2.0 Controller Add-on card (lspci currently not available)

This happens with x86 AND x86_64. Ich checked this on a Athlon 64 system with
the nForce4 and on a Pentium4 System with a NEC 2.0 USB Add-on card. Using the
iPod shuffle on the onBoard USB1 controller of the Pentium4 Board works fine.

The error messages right after plugging the iPod shuffle in are:

------------------
usb 2-1: new high speed USB device using address 20
usb 2-1: control timeout on ep0in
------------------

and so on ... I am attaching a dmesg output. Currently the ipod is plugged in
into g164.suse.de which can be used for debugging.

Comment 1 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-05 09:54:13 UTC

Created attachment 44952 [details]
dmesg output of g164 while a iPod shuffle is attached

Comment 2 Olaf Hering 2005-08-05 14:57:28 UTC

can you try a 10.0 preview4 cd, or the bootiso, on such a system? The kernel is
from sles9.

Comment 3 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-06 17:50:32 UTC

I will do this on monday. On my system @home the behaviour is slightly
different. There I get a:

-- snippet from dmesg --
hub 2-0:1.0: hub_port_status failed (err = -32)
ehci_hcd 0000:00:02.1: port 7 reset error -110
hub 2-0:1.0: hub_port_status failed (err = -32)
usb 2-7: configuration #1 chosen from 2 choices
scsi5 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices
usb-storage: device found at 7
usb-storage: waiting for device to settle before scanning
-- snippet from dmesg --

after plugging it in. I will attach a complete dmesg and hwinfo output.

Comment 4 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-06 17:52:01 UTC

Created attachment 45064 [details]
dmesg of tsieden's home sytem

Comment 5 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-06 17:53:43 UTC

Created attachment 45065 [details]
hwinfo of tsieden's home system

Comment 6 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-08 08:30:35 UTC

comment #2 :
I checked again with preview4 on the same machine that was mentioned in the
initial report. Now I got a "waiting for device to settle before scanning"
followed by usb errors followed by a Oops. I checked this two times. The Oops is
reproducable. Attaching logs ...

Comment 7 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-08 08:35:28 UTC

Created attachment 45085 [details]
/var/log/messages with kerneloops and sysrq-[PTM]

Comment 8 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-08 08:36:53 UTC

Created attachment 45086 [details]
hwinfo of affected system

Comment 9 Greg Kroah-Hartman 2005-08-10 18:35:02 UTC

If you unload the ehci-hcd driver before plugging in the device, does
it work properly (yes, it will be slower)?

Comment 10 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-12 09:25:57 UTC

yes, 'rmmod ehci-hcd' before plugging the iPos shuffle in works without problems.

Comment 11 Greg Kroah-Hartman 2005-08-16 07:54:06 UTC

Ok, with ehci-hcd loaded, if you change
/sys/module/usbcore/parameters/old_scheme_first to "1" does that make the 
device work properly?

Comment 14 Thomas Siedentopf 2005-08-17 20:23:10 UTC

I checked right now with the rescue system from SUSE 10.0 beta2 and the device
works properly with a "1" in /sys/module/usbcore/parameters/old_scheme_first ,
but now it also works without piping a "1" into the file first. Was there a
major change in a possible affected area between preview4 and beta2
(unfortunately I had no chance to check this with beta1 ...)?

Comment 15 Greg Kroah-Hartman 2005-08-18 00:45:23 UTC

Yes, lots of things have changed in there, mostly for the better.

Glad it's now working for you, thanks for testing and letting me know.