Message-ID: <4B4A2DAA.2050104@superbug.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:42:34 +0000
From: James Courtier-Dutton <James@superbug.co.uk>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091213 Thunderbird/3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Paul G. Allen" <pgallen@gmail.com>
CC: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux Serial Performance
References: <bd8e30a41001091057t97f90abgffe9cca329ace477@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <bd8e30a41001091057t97f90abgffe9cca329ace477@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1309
Lines: 36

On 09/01/10 18:57, Paul G. Allen wrote:
> I am wondering, have there been any performance tests comparing Linux
> serial IO to Windows and what was the result? Is it a problem in the
> comm API (e.g. - the Windows DLL having better performance than the
> Linux .so)? Is it a problem in the Linux serial driver itself? Is
> there something I can/need to do on Linux to tweak the driver and make
> it faster?
>
> Thanks,
>
> PGA
>   
If you can narrow down the problem, one might be able to help.
I would suggest that you write a test Java program that both sends and
receives data on the same port and then post that source code to the list.
Anyone can then plug in a serial loopback connector, and  reproduce the
problems you observe.

Without any way to reproduce the problems you observe, there is very
little chance of fixing it.
I suspect the problem is probably due to interrupts and serial buffer sizes.

As an aside, I would probably have used usb instead of serial as the
interface. It would be faster but not a lot more expensive.

Kind Regards

James


--
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/