Messages in this thread | | | From | "David Campbell" <> | Date | Mon, 9 Feb 1998 06:50:11 +0000 | Subject | Re: [PARPORT] Re: lpr problems in 2.0->2.1? |
| |
> To: Trond Eivind Glomsrod <teg@pvv.ntnu.no> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-parport@torque.net > Subject: [PARPORT] Re: lpr problems in 2.0->2.1? > Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 18:09:00 +0000 > From: Philip Blundell <Philip.Blundell@pobox.com>
> >For me, that has made the printer _really_ slow - the data is > >transferred in chunks, so the printer pauses for quite some time a > >few times for every page, while the same setup prints continually (and > > If you're getting worse performance under 2.1 then you should report it as a > bug. It's not supposed to be like that. If you are actually using a Zip > driver at the same time then printing speed will go down, but otherwise it > should be just as good.
The problem is most likely that the current lp driver is evaluating the parallel port base address every IO access. A similar problem reduced the speed of the ZIP drive by approx 50% until a port caching scheme was implemented.
I issued a patch once on the parallel port mailing list once for this problem. However Andrea Arcangeli is currently the maintainer for the lp driver.
Note: Andrea is the one who keeps posting lp patches, this doesn't make him the maintainer. I have enough problems with ZIP drives as it is...
David Campbell ======================================================= campbell@torque.net (Parallel port device related mail) dcampbel@p01.as17.honeywell.com.au (For all other mail)
"All parallel ports are equal - Some are more equal than others" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |