![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
> > > I'd rather eliminate as much overhead as possible -- I already get > > > complaints from performance fanatics about the inability of usb-storage to > > > get past 92% bus saturation (sustained), and the problem will only get > > > worse on USB 2.0 > > > > Well then you'll be glad to see a patch from me, soonish, that teaches > > the usb-storage "transport" code to use bulk queueing. That'll get the > > bandwidth utilization up as high as it can get. It won't address any of > > these highmem issues though. > > And there's the overhead of sleeping and waking a kernel thread. Larger io > requests might help, but I am not sure. Yes, it's that sleep/wake between scatterlist segments that's creating that 92% (at 12 Mbit/sec) or about 20% (at 480 Mbit/sec :) bottleneck ... Convert those calls to use bulk queuing, and those delays vanish. - Dave - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:15 [W:1.141 / U:0.080 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||