On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:51:22AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> So perhaps the answer is then that this flag should
> be set for any driver (say, most usb network drivers
> including "usbnet") which post bulk reads for data that
> might not arrive for some long time?
But when they arrive, you need a high bandwidth, so you have to unset it...
Not easy to predict which URB will sleep longer than another URB...
> That flag isn't well documented ... no mention in
> linux/Documentation/usb/* of any kind.
Wasn't there in the first place and OHCI doesn't need it, it's (yet again) a
specific fix for a specific chip flaw...
> And there I was thinking "bandwidth reclamation" was
> for optimizing bandwidth usage, not pessimizing it! :)
USB bandwidth, other busses don't matter...
But seriously, what should be the correct heuristic for that? Decreasing the
reclamation duration leads to problems with some devices (as a posting
recently showed...). No reclamation provides miserable USB bandwidth and
depth first sequence has no fair scheduling.
--
Georg Acher, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.in.tum.de/~acher/
"Oh no, not again !" The bowl of petunias
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
