Re: 2.4 vs 2.6 USB mass storage device performance
David Brownell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.usb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Friday 30 November 2007, Alan Stern wrote: > > how does it > > effect the performance? > > It doesn't affect performance at all. > > > I did change this API too to > > use usb_sg routines but couldn't test it as it never > > gets called while I do scsi xfer. > > That's why it doesn't affect the performance! :-) And you won't be able to convert to the usb_sg_*() routines without updating all the HCDs and usbcore to handle the related clean semantics for URB completion and queueing. The scope of those changes is the reason I described the performance limitation as intrinsic to the 2.4 USB stack, and not amenable to fixing. - Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 _______________________________________________ [email protected] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel