From: Open Source <opensource3141@yahoo.com>
To: linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: USB performance bug since kernel 2.6.13 (CRITICAL???)
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 12:33:13 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061012193313.4281.qmail@web58107.mail.re3.yahoo.com> (raw)
(Resending because linux-usb-devel@sourceforge.net bounced right back to me. Sorry for the multiple messages!)
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Open Source <opensource3141@yahoo.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-usb-devel@sourceforge.net
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:21:56 PM
Subject: USB performance bug since kernel 2.6.13 (CRITICAL???)
Hi all,
I am writing regarding a performance issue that I recently observed after upgrading from kernel 2.6.12 to 2.6.17. I did some hunting around and have found that the issue first arises in 2.6.13.
I am using a device that submits URBs asynchronously using the libusb devio infrastructure. In version 2.6.12 I am able to submit and reap URBs for my particular application at a transaction rate of one per millisecond. A transaction consists of a single WRITE URB (< 512 bytes) followed by a single READ URB (1024 bytes). Once I upgrade to version 2.6.13, the transactional rate drops to one per 4 milliseconds!
The overall performance of a particular algorithm is increased from a total execution time of 75 seconds to over 160 seconds. The only difference between the two tests is the kernel. Microsoft Windows executes the algorithm in 70-75 seconds!
I am using a Fedora Core distribution with FC4 kernels for testing. Is there some new incantation that is required in my user-mode driver to get around a "feature" in recent kernels? Does anyone else know about this? I was not able to easily find discussion about this on the newsgroups. It appears that this problem has been around for a while, if it is indeed a problem.
I am not a subscriber to the linux-kernel mailing list but have cross-posted to it since this seems like a serious enough issue. Please continue to keep any responses on linux-usb-devel as well so I can see them in my email box.
Thank you,
Beleaguered Open Source Fan
next reply other threads:[~2006-10-12 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-12 19:33 Open Source [this message]
2006-10-12 19:55 ` Lee Revell
2006-10-13 13:56 ` [linux-usb-devel] " Alan Stern
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-10-14 16:33 Open Source
2006-10-13 23:30 Open Source
2006-10-14 0:24 ` Alan Cox
2006-10-13 19:31 Open Source
2006-10-12 20:56 Open Source
2006-10-12 21:26 ` Lee Revell
2006-10-13 12:12 ` Ed Tomlinson
2006-10-12 20:05 Open Source
2006-10-12 20:19 ` Lee Revell
2006-10-12 19:21 Open Source
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061012193313.4281.qmail@web58107.mail.re3.yahoo.com \
--to=opensource3141@yahoo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®