Generic USB 2.0 hub showing up as USB 1.1
in [Linux Hardware]
|
Prev: Yamaha PSR-E313 : accessing flash memory with linux
Next: M'I.5 Persecution MI 5 are Afr aid to Ad mit T heyre Behind t he Persecuti on
From: Yousuf Khan on 30 Dec 2007 12:55 Meat Plow wrote: > I can almost guaranty that an operating system can't leave any USB hub > (fixed). > > Can you compare the data transfer rate of the hub in question while in XP > to that in linux? Take a large file say 100 megs and transfer it from an > external drive and time it. I'd like to see which is faster, XP or linux > or if it;s the same. Well, that's not going to be likely to do. Since the newer hub is so unreliable, I'm only trusting it with light duty at the moment, such as mouse and keyboard connections, nothing data-heavy like external HDs, or thumbdrives. Yousuf Khan
From: Nate Edel on 30 Dec 2007 18:01 In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Yousuf Khan <bbbl67(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Isn't everything made in China these days? Avoiding Chinese made hubs > might be like trying to avoid any Swiss chocolate made in Switzerland. Depends on if by China, you mean both Taiwan and the PRC or just the PRC. For that matter, since "made in" usually means final assembly, there are probably some from Thailand and Malaysia too. -- Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/ preferred email | is "nate" at the | "This is not a funny signature... or is it?" posting domain |
From: VanguardLH on 30 Dec 2007 21:52 "Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:6tidnXGw-9eXeuraRVn_vwA(a)giganews.com... > VanguardLH wrote: >> Have you visited the manufacturer's web site to get the specs on >> those USB hubs? Having the same hardware (i.e., chipset) says >> nothing about how the manufacturer utilized that hardware. Lots of >> analog modems use the same Conexant chip but the *cards* don't have >> the same feature set. Same subsystem components do not enforce the >> same system features. Could be one of the hubs really only is 1.1 >> compliant and that using it as a 2.0 device is not recommended. Of >> course, the device could be just a crappy low-grade cheap unit that >> doesn't properly respond to report itself correctly, or you need a >> better USB cable. > > Well, as I said previously, these are "generic" hubs, very generic. > I doubt any of us have heard of the manufacturers' names: there > isn't much point in checking their websites, they probably sell tons > of little products. One is from Vantec and the other is Acrox. The > Acrox is the older more reliable one. Both of them are advertised as > USB 2.0 hubs, and both of them are identified as "USB2.0 Hub" > internally, polled from the USB configuration itself. Vantec is not a small company but that doesn't mean everything they sell is something they themself produced but might instead have slapped their label on it (http://www.vantecusa.com/). The current USB hub selections are shown at http://www.vantecusa.com/product-peripheral.html. They do seem confused between what is self-powered and bus-powered hubs (what they say for self-powered is actually for bus-powered). Have you tried swapping to which USB ports these hubs are connected (i.e., swap them between themselves) to see if the problem stays with whatever hub in on a USB port or if the problem migrates with to whichever port the hub gets moved? That is, does the problem move with the hub or remain with the USB port?
From: Little Gorm on 31 Dec 2007 00:06 > I have two generic 4-port USB hubs that are supposed to be USB 2.0 > compliant. The older one is fine, works as advertised. Meanwhile the > newer one sometimes shows up under the USB 2.0 root hub (i.e. > "Standard Enhanced PCI to USB Host Controller"), or usually it shows > up under the slower "Standard OpenHCD USB Host Controller" (USB 1.1). > > My motherboard (Asus M2NPV-VM) USB ports are all USB 2.0 compliant, > and they individually auto-detect whether they need to switch down to > USB 1.1 speeds. I'm using a Microsoft tool called UVCView under > Windows XP to display the details of the USB devices, including the > hubs and roothubs. > > According to UVCView, the older hub and newer hub seem to have the > same chipset vendor (idVendor = "Genesys Logic, Inc."), although > externally they look quite different and have different brand names. > So I'm not sure why one would be consistently USB 2.0 compliant, while > the other one is not. > > Now another interesting thing I noticed is that the inconsistent hub > will only show up as USB 2.0-compliant after I boot into Windows after > having previously rebooted from Ubuntu 7.10 Linux (dual-boot system). > So maybe Linux does something to the device that puts it right. But > when I list the devices while in Linux I see that it is listed under > USB 1.1 just like when in Windows. I have no idea why Linux leaves the > hub fixed for Windows, but doesn't fix it for itself?! > > Any idea what's going on with this hub? > > Yousuf Khan What you may want to do since you are running an Asus board, is go into Bios setup on bootup before your OS loads. Under one of the tabs across the top, there is a check for "I am using an OS that checks for plug and play" or something like that. It may be that your Bios is not setting the USB ports and allow only the operating system to do that. It sounds as if Windows is setting the USB port/hubs and then you switch into Linux. Anyway, might be worth a try.
From: Yousuf Khan on 31 Dec 2007 04:06
VanguardLH wrote: > Have you tried swapping to which USB ports these hubs are connected > (i.e., swap them between themselves) to see if the problem stays with > whatever hub in on a USB port or if the problem migrates with to > whichever port the hub gets moved? That is, does the problem move with > the hub or remain with the USB port? Yeah, moving the cables around throughout all of the USB ports was the first thing I tried. The problem moves with the hub, not with the USB port. I've even tried a different cable as suggested elsewhere in this thread. It didn't help. However, as I said before, going into Linux and then rebooting into Windows fixes it for some inexplicable reason. So far this trick has worked 100% reliably. Yousuf Khan |