Andrea Arcangeli (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Sat, 3 Jan 1998 19:33:21 +0100 (CET)
On Sat, 3 Jan 1998, Philip Blundell wrote:
>>I made a minimal set of changes to allow the code to works _fine_. These
>>are all against your latest version of parport code (that you sent me of
>OK, these are all in. I fixed your spelling of `yield' too. :)
>>5. I optimized a bit (probably not needed) the timeslip suggesting to be
>> a register variable.
>There's no need. GCC is smart enough to put variables in registers where it's
>>Phil, I' d like to see my name in parport_share.c at least as bug fixer
>Done. As soon as I can reach Vger again I'll make a new patch against 2.1.77.
>BTW, Eddie mentioned that he'd like to get rid of the LP_WAIT stuff in lp.c.
>I can see his point. Would somebody like to look into providing a delay
>function with better than microsecond resolution? Apparently we want a delay
>of about 0.5us there by default but it would be nice if it was user-tuneable.
>At the moment we have udelay(1) in there for SPARC but I think that's too
>much. I did some quick sums and it looks like that delay would reduce a
>200KB/s transfer rate to 145KB/s (and 500KB/s would be reduced to 252KB/s),
>which may well upset people.
I forget to ask this, why for sparc and not for other arch?
-- To unsubscribe, send mail to: email@example.com --
-- with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed 30 Dec 1998 - 10:17:17 EST