Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-20 Thread Pete Zaitcev
> From: Vojtech Pavlik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 09:02:57 +0200 > Pete: Can you try this patch instead of removing NO_FSBR? > +#define ACM_BUFFER_SIZE 1024 Nope, does not help for our user. The other guy, who posted this before on linux-usb-devel, did not reply.

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-16 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39238 > > > > > > I think I'll just take that flag off from the read URB for us. > > > > ...and you get 5x slowdown on PCI bandwidth when using modem... > > Users prefer 5x slowdown to not working modem, evidently. > > People all

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-15 Thread Pete Zaitcev
> From: Vojtech Pavlik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Georg Acher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Zaitcev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 09:02:57 +0200 > Pete: Can you try this patch instead of removing NO_FSBR? Unfortunately, I need to poke the user, only he has the b

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-14 Thread Vojtech Pavlik
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 01:24:31AM +0200, Georg Acher wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 11:11:03PM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > <...> > > Perhaps there is indeed something with flow control, and perhaps we > > indeed need to be able to receive more than the 64 bytes in a frame, but > > still if

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-14 Thread Georg Acher
On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 11:11:03PM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: <...> > Perhaps there is indeed something with flow control, and perhaps we > indeed need to be able to receive more than the 64 bytes in a frame, but > still if there is any method to do that other than enabling FSBR, we > need to t

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-14 Thread Vojtech Pavlik
On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 01:31:27PM -0400, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39238 > > > > > > > > > > I think I'll just take that flag off from the read URB for us. > > > > > > > > ...and you get 5x slowdown on PCI bandwidth when using modem... >

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-14 Thread Pete Zaitcev
> From: Vojtech Pavlik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm > Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 18:59:08 +0200 > > > From: Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] &

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-14 Thread Vojtech Pavlik
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 01:23:14PM -0400, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > From: Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 00:42:16 +0200 > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39238 > > > > > > I think I'll just take that flag off from th

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-13 Thread Pete Zaitcev
> From: Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 00:42:16 +0200 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39238 > > > > I think I'll just take that flag off from the read URB for us. > > ...and you get 5x slowdown on PCI bandwidth when usi

Re: [linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-13 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39238 > > I think I'll just take that flag off from the read URB for us. ...and you get 5x slowdown on PCI bandwidth when using modem... Pavel -- I'm [EMAIL PROTECTED] "I

[linux-usb-devel] What about NO_FSBR in acm

2001-06-12 Thread Pete Zaitcev
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39238 I think I'll just take that flag off from the read URB for us. -- Pete ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-d