On Tue, Jun 15, 2004, Duncan Sands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 June 2004 18:01, David Brownell wrote:
> > Duncan Sands wrote:
> > >>Are there plans to replace usbfs with sysfs, or increase sysfs's 
> > >>functionality (e.g. I/O with device endpoints)?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I have a plan to rewrite usbfs along the lines of gadgetfs.
> > 
> > How much of a plan?  :)
> 
> More of a desire than a plan :)  I wanted to first clean up the existing
> usbfs a bit, in order to understand it better, then design usbfs2.  I'm
> at the beginning of the cleaning phase.
> 
> > I have some notes about what I think "usbfs2" should
> > probably do.  With more questions than answers, to be
> > honest!  Because "more like gadgetfs" only gets part
> > way into the problem.  Would it help if I posted that?
> 
> Please do.

I'll pipe up with a request. Larger buffers for URB operations. People
are having problems getting maximum performance with USB 2.0 devices out
of userspace.

The synchronous USB bulk call has a maximum of the page size (4KB on
x86), and the URB call has a maximum of 16KB. Neither is large enough to
get the best performance.

Would anyone accept a patch to increase the maximum buffer size in the
existing usbfs?

JE



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by The 2004 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Learn from the experts at JavaOne(SM), Sun's Worldwide Java Developer
Conference, June 28 - July 1 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, CA
REGISTER AND SAVE! http://java.sun.com/javaone/sf Priority Code NWMGYKND
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel

Reply via email to