[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Winmodem support, some performance tradeoff estimates
    > specifications secret, please always identify the specific chips for
    > which specifications are not available, and, ideally, who contacted
    > these vendors and when. If you are going to make architectural

    I poked around USR a bit when I worked for 3com (ie after the 'merger')
    and got no progress.

    > in the cost/performance tradeoffs. Otherwise, please just admit to
    > the current shortcoming in the Linux kernel (nobody has yet written a
    > free soft modem stack), so that people will continue to trust what you

    Amusing side exercise. List the patent licenses required for a 33.6
    modem remebering in the US the USPO has some odd ideas about patenting
    pure maths.

    > o It can be argued that Linux users will collectively
    > waste $100+ million in the absense of winmodem
    > Linux drivers.

    You claim the CPU difference is $6. Ok where are the numbers from. Digitals
    own figures for a 200Mhz strongarm SA110 and their commercial software
    mode is 25% of the resources of the chip. The real issue though appears
    to be entirely patents and chip documentation.

    > means the performance of using a soft modem is about 8 Pentium MHz,
    > on the grounds that 1 32-bit Pentium MHz =~ 1 64-bit R4000 MHz in the

    Way off. Firstly Im dubious about the 8Mhz, secondly the R4K's tend to
    have DSP instructions (ones that are useful). Pentiums dont have an
    add/multiply with no stall instruction once per clock.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.018 / U:3.168 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site