Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755017AbaBSTRh (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:17:37 -0500 Received: from lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk ([81.2.110.251]:33380 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754034AbaBSTRf (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:17:35 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 19:17:17 +0000 From: One Thousand Gnomes To: Peter Hurley Cc: Grant Edwards , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: locking changes in tty broke low latency feature Message-ID: <20140219191717.486ac4d0@alan.etchedpixels.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <5304EC33.5040502@hurleysoftware.com> References: <20140218093829.GC1741@redhat.com> <5303DABD.9000302@hurleysoftware.com> <20140219130308.GC1851@redhat.com> <5304EC33.5040502@hurleysoftware.com> Organization: Intel Corporation X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > How can the requirement be for both must-handle-in-minimum-time data > (low_latency) and the-userspace-reader-isn't-reading-fast-enough- > so-its-ok-to-halt-transmission ? Because low latency is about *turn around* time. There are plenty of protocols that can flow control, do flow control and want low latency because they are not windowed. It's not mutually exclusive by any means. > But first I'd like some hard data on whether or not a low latency > mode is even necessary (at least for user-space). The easy way to simulate the annoying as crap worst cases from dumbass firmware downloaders and the like is to set up a link between two PCs and time 2000+ repetitions of send 64 bytes wait for a Y send 64 bytes wait for a Y .... and the matching far end being a box running an existing kernel or a PIC or something doing the responses. Historically we used to lose about 20mS per cycle which over 2000 got to be a bit of a PITA. Low latency goes back to the days of flip buffers, bottom halves an a 100Hz clock. There are certainly better ways to do it now if its needed. Alan -- 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/