Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753563Ab2HPOZJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:25:09 -0400 Received: from lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk ([81.2.110.251]:48981 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752205Ab2HPOZH (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:25:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:29:18 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: leroy christophe Cc: Alan Cox , Vitaly Bordug , Marcelo Tosatti , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Powerpc 8xx CPM_UART delay in receive Message-ID: <20120816152918.5ed2649f@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <502CF2A0.8080109@c-s.fr> References: <201208141426.q7EEQSPc003956@localhost.localdomain> <20120814155227.018988da@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <502CF2A0.8080109@c-s.fr> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.8; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Face: 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 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 Content-Length: 890 Lines: 20 > The PowerPC CPM is working differently. It doesn't use a fifo but > buffers. Buffers are handed to the microprocessor only when they are > full or after a timeout period which is adjustable. In the driver, the Which is different how - remembering we empty the FIFO on an IRQ > buffers are configured with a size of 32 bytes. And the timeout is set > to the size of the buffer. That is this timeout that I'm reducing to 1 > byte in my proposed patch. I can't see what it would break for high > speed I/O. How can a timeout be measured in "bytes". Can we have a bit more clarity on how the hardware works and take it from there ? 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/