So far, it's worked fine here.  The other team members are going to test
it out and let us know.  I've dumped a couple of 100's of megs to the Rio
using usbdevfs and no problems, yet. :)  I know that we plan to support
BOTH interfaces for compat with the xBSD folks, since they don't have this
capability...  I just got the thing to work the day I posted the
comparisons, so I know that we'd like to hammer at it a little bit.

Bruce

> Well, probably not today, but I hope that it
> can soon.
> 
> Bruce?
> 
> ~Randy
> ___________________________________________________
> |Randy Dunlap     Intel Corp., DAL    Sr. SW Engr.|
> |randy.dunlap.at.intel.com            503-696-2055|
> |NOTE:  Any views presented here are mine alone   |
> |and may not represent the views of my employer.  |
> |_________________________________________________|
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pavel Machek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 2:49 AM
> > To: Dunlap, Randy; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: Re: [linux-usb] FW: usbdevfs comparison (Rio500)
> > 
> > > Hi everyone.  Just performed a comparison by dumping Sting's Mercury
> > > Falling CD to the Rio.  Here's the results (using uhci.o with unlink
> > > optimzations turned on)  I seem to remember a uhci driver 
> > that was MUCH
> > > faster at one time.  Looks like usb-uhci is a bit faster 
> > and the usbdevfs
> > > vs. kernel space very comparable
> > > 
> > > ===========================================================
> > > With uhci.o (with unlink optimizations turned on)
> > > 
> > >            USBDEVFS                 Kernel Space Driver
> > > End Time   14:28:57      End Time   14:46:34
> > > Start Time 14:15:07      Start Time 14:32:32
> > >            ---------                --------
> > > Time used     13:50      Time used     14:02
> > > 
> > > ===========================================================
> > > Now, with usb-uhci.o
> > > 
> > >            USBDEVFS                 Kernel Space Driver
> > > End Time   14:57:03      End Time   14:52:12 
> > > Start Time 14:54:50      Start Time 14:49:00
> > >            --------                 --------
> > > Time used      2:13      Time used      3:12
> > 
> > Hmm, userspace approach was even _faster_?
> > 
> > Anyways, does that mean that rio is going out of the kernel?
> >                                                             Pavel
> > -- 
> 

Bruce Tenison
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Public Key available at: http://www.keyserver.net



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to