Re: Debian Kernel 2.6.12 and parallel port problems.

[Malcolm Lalkaka <mlalkaka@gmail.com>]

I just thought of another thing that could be causing this problem:
udev. When I upgraded to kernel version 2.6.12, it would not let me
upgrade my kernel unless I upgraded udev as well. Since you seem to be
having similar problems with a different sort of device, I'm led to
believe that the problem may lie in udev, not necessarily in the
kernel. Currently, my udev version, as stated by dpkg, is 0.068-2.

What's your udev version (`dpkg -s udev | grep -i version`)?

     Malcolm

P.S.: If anyone else in the mailing list knows anything about this,
please reply to this email. Thank you.


On 9/27/05, Jason Martens <me@jasonmartens.com> wrote:
> Malcolm Lalkaka wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >I'm running Debian Etch (testing) and after upgrading to the debian
> >kernel version 2.6.12-1-686, my parallel port printer no longer seems
> >to work. What I mean is that Debian doesn't seem to be able to
> >communicate with it. Everything is physically plugged in: power and
> >parallel cable.
> >
> <snip>
>
> >NOW, here is the important part. after sending a print command, I
> >check dmesg, and 3 new lines are outputted:
> >     parport0: FIFO is stuck
> >     parport0: BUSY timeout (1) in compat_write_block_pio
> >     DMA write timed out
> >
> >
> I have a similar problem with DMA for my cdrom drives (bug #330176).  It
> sounds like it is definitely a kernel problem if it worked fine with the
> old kernel.  If you can, try to figure out how the kernel config changed
> from the 2.6.8 to the 2.6.12 kernel, especially in regards to DMA.
>
> >Unfortunately, I have no idea what to do with this information. But I
> >do know that my printer worked fine using CUPS and the same driver on
> >an older 2.6.8 kernel. I suppose it could be a bug, in which case I
> >should probably report it to the Bug Tracking System. But I don't know
> >which package I should put it under, since there are linux-image-2.6,
> >linux-image-2.6-686, linux-image-2.6.12-1-686.
> >
> >
> I think that if you log it against any of those packages, they all end
> up getting logged against the source package anyway, so it doesn't
> matter too much.  But I logged my bug against
> linux-image-2.6.12-1-686-smp or something like that.
>
> Jason Martens