Comment 84 for bug 990260

(In reply to comment #69)
> (In reply to comment #68)
> > Created an attachment (id=75601) [details] [details]
> > indeferend i/o log
> [...]
> > [ 2.430719] i8042: [337] 91 -> i8042 (command)
> > [ 2.430933] i8042: [337] 66 -> i8042 (parameter)
> > [ 2.434670] i8042: [338] fe <- i8042 (interrupt, 3, 12)
> > [ 2.435926] i8042: [339] 91 -> i8042 (command)
> > [ 2.436088] i8042: [339] 88 -> i8042 (parameter)
>
> Missing the 'fc' response.
>
> > [ 2.466948] i8042: [347] 91 -> i8042 (command)
> > [ 2.467524] i8042: [347] f3 -> i8042 (parameter)
> > [ 2.470534] i8042: [347] fc <- i8042 (interrupt, 3, 12)
>
> Should be 'fa' instead.
>
> [ 2.470551] i8042: [347] 91 -> i8042 (command)
> [ 2.470766] i8042: [347] f4 -> i8042 (parameter)
> [ 2.474091] i8042: [348] fa <- i8042 (interrupt, 3, 12)
> [ 2.474127] psmouse serio2: sentelic: READ REG: 0x00 is 0x00 (rc = -1)
>
> It looks to me that EC response is one byte slower. Will there be any
> difference if you increase FSP_CMD_TIMEOUT2 from 30 to something larger
> (ex: 2500)?

did not help