From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-x22f.google.com (mail-pf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F8EE1A1E56 for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 18:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 128so25652270pfz.0 for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 18:36:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=RZEzWhnE4S5tBb2SGyNikVK9vRQh8MvRChV0uQSlqbw=; b=cKDM7ygYvz7wpGe+jesaUfhzpNcySpeV9nAlZB/fQzPscBCo4/kVLX+CCMpOxVqcCe JRRSqqINiIAnoDyOHu31mIc7kln6kni7uXrnTOwIDetqohon1aLKlHuHLGyt02R2HqbA g7qZZuGldqpGPpNSU8tDALZRYNplZV4nzRFdA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=RZEzWhnE4S5tBb2SGyNikVK9vRQh8MvRChV0uQSlqbw=; b=fUFefhjmAiifyUdYUn6t1LKVZUzygdbHaSLuXbYncI7pIQGIcI1M3LJxJDxIlAn8c4 JvKtw1hBGK+2oUFs9lmFWh2/8kV8QgIlLUXa3eFdaKLYtLr/ZP8MXEJnNvmlHe0MIbL1 o8ktUBOVZP1JnRGHhmbuxcvbYh3kZA8KH/W+xLDeU7WmFGrMMkbphdeqmU4mKxdiiPzm XKqQP+znZAyW4CJOPOvin8ir5D5Jr5DKX1sxpp4A6DojYUWK5rZxW5fk6bVj+Tf1sB5y bwYMSw4aynYOKZLVQUJtfB1f6rF79ujz2qtGEcPyfvV5lMFAINOHvNP+ST2uUFuGRwKa sqQg== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rk0obufSuwlcjrmYwoTZ384iIyY0giyuUiWlAgbAooDTo7gXPj4siWktH/gihns706P X-Received: by 10.99.60.19 with SMTP id j19mr13556568pga.8.1476927389354; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 18:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.229.36.249] ([119.145.15.121]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a9sm66608970pfa.38.2016.10.19.18.36.28 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 19 Oct 2016 18:36:28 -0700 (PDT) To: "Tian, Feng" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" References: <47a8c44f-e72f-a993-a0a0-0ee38d2735d3@linaro.org> <7F1BAD85ADEA444D97065A60D2E97EE566E3700D@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Cc: "Zeng, Star" From: Heyi Guo Message-ID: <9bfb0409-b247-682c-e3ff-578cacc83859@linaro.org> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 09:35:11 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7F1BAD85ADEA444D97065A60D2E97EE566E3700D@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Subject: Re: Why is USB_BOOT_IO_BLOCKS set to 128? X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 01:36:29 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit It is a BMC virtual USB channel for BMC KVM. 在 10/19/2016 10:10 AM, Tian, Feng 写道: > It's just an experience value and has been here about 10 years... > > Which usb brand/model name do you have problem on? > > Thanks > Feng > > -----Original Message----- > From: Heyi Guo [mailto:heyi.guo@linaro.org] > Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 9:57 AM > To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org > Cc: Tian, Feng ; Zeng, Star > Subject: [edk2] Why is USB_BOOT_IO_BLOCKS set to 128? > > Dear experts, > > Could anyone help to explain why USB_BOOT_IO_BLOCKS in MdeModulePkg/Bus/Usb/UsbMassStorageDxe/UsbMassBoot.h is set to 128? > > We found on some platforms this value may cause USB boot failure and > *64* blocks will make them work. Though we have not got the final root cause, it will be really helpful if you can tell the reason of setting it to 128 and possible root cause for such issue. > > Thanks and regards, > > Heyi >