Simon Kagstrom wrote: > Well, the interesting thing which I noticed with the level-triggered > interrupts was that using no threshol (data ready interrupts) are a lot > less invasive (time is mostly spent in userspace) than using the small > threshold (when >90% of the time is spent handling interrupts).
Just to be clear: is what you're seeing here expected behaviour because you asked for an interrupt on every slight change ? Or do you think the number of interrupts is too large for the changes you get ? It seems that the best combination for games would be a threshold AND a period. That way, you don't get interrupts until something has actually happened, and at the same time you're protected against user space getting starved by a flood of them (hmm, that's where the metaphor breaks down :-) The AOI bit in FF_WU_CFG_x seems to be able to do just that. - Werner
