Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : mouse trouble : solved by accident

[Michael Mol]

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Paul Hartman
<paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:06:01PM -0400, Philip Webb wrote
>>>
>>> > The effect is quite bizarre & it was the gods who saved me :
>>> > if I hadn't happened to plug the mouse into the neighbouring port,
>>> > I could have spent days struggling to find out what was wrong
>>> > & even taken the mobo back to the store as defective.
>>> >
>>> > Both Mageia -- installed from USB stick in a partition on the
>>> > HDD -- & System Rescue show  /dev/input/mouse0  after booting ;
>>> > in the case of SR it does it before I enter the GUI via 'wizard'.
>>> > They have no problem with the 2.0/1.1 port, but the Gentoo system as
>>> > I've installed it don't show  /dev/input/mouse0 from that port, but
>>> > only if I plug the mouse into the 3.0/2.0 port.  Someone suggested
>>> > it is caused by a Kernel .config setting, which if enabled seems to
>>> > force the system to look in the 3.0 port.  Why it should do that
>>> > doesn't make much sense : such upgrades are usually permissive,
>>> > not restrictive.  BTW there's no difference between 3.4.9 & 3.5.3 .
>>>
>>>   Is the cpu AMD?  Intel machines require UHCI (USB 1.1) and AMD
>>> machines require OHCI (USB 1.0) for lowspeed USB devices like keyboards
>>> and mice.  There's a root hub translator selection in .config that's
>>> *SUPPOSED* to work with keyboards+mice, using only the EHCI kernel
>>> driver, but I never could get it to work.
>>
>>
>> UHCI vs OHCI has nothing to do with the CPU, but with the chipset on the
>> system. I haven't seen an OHCI-supporting chip in over a decade, either, and
>> most of my systems have been AMD.
>>
>> Either way, there's no harm in enabling both.
>
> On my laptop (circa 2004) I have to load the USB modules (?HCI) in a
> specific order otherwise things don't work properly. I don't remember
> what that order is, exactly, as I'm not using it at the moment, but
> thought I'd mention it FWIW...

That may be true. I always kept them as built-ins, as having a USB
keyboard be unavailable during a failed boot sequence would be a PITA.

>



-- 
:wq