Tim Waugh wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 07:44:29PM +0200, stef wrote:
>
>> Well, from the strace, it appears that reading the parport
>>only brings back 1024 bytes out of the 1696 asked. Since the code
>>does not check the return code, things go wrong. But it is a new
>>behaviour which is not exhibited by 2.4.18, which allways returned
>>all the data.
>>
>
>Nonetheless, ppdev is within its rights to do this. The reason is
>that it uses a buffer that is only 1k big---this needs to be
>enlarged. Care to suggest a reasonable size?
>
>(You'll still need to do read() in a loop.)
>
I added the loop and compared the scanning times between 2.4.18
and 2.4.19.
2.4.19 was faster of half a second for a 3 minutes scan ... So I think
this size of buffer
is OK for me.
>
>> The SANE backend does not catch any signal, nor does the
>>little test program that use it. So I'm a bit puzzled.
>>
>
>Me too. I don't see any other reasons that ERESTARTSYS would appear.
>
>Tim.
>*/
>
Regards,
Stef
>
-- To unsubscribe, send mail to: linux-parport-request@torque.net --
-- with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 15 2002 - 04:32:00 EDT