All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>
To: Paul Fulghum <paulkf@microgate.com>
Cc: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
	Linux Kernel ML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: How to avoid serial port buffer overruns?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 18:10:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060817161042.GC10818@ouaza.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1155767066.2600.19.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Paul Fulghum wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 17:12 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> > 2.6.15 and 2.6.16.  Here is the .config:
> 
> Alan's rework of the receive tty buffering went
> into 2.6.16 and cured some problems, but clearly not yours.
> Some more adjustments are in 2.6.18-rc4, so that
> would be interesting to try for diagnosing this.

I will try 2.6.18-rc4 and keep you informed.

> I was wondering if the problem was interrupt latency,
> the tty receive buffering, or something totally different.
> I don't know if your problem and Raphael's are caused
> by the same mechanism. I would still like to know which
> kernel versions he has tried.

I tried 2.6.17.7.

But I'm really not sure that the 2.6 is a regression from 2.4, in fact I
think it does better by default.

The stock 2.4.31 kernel I was using had serial overruns at 9600 bauds
already. Once patched with the low latency/preemptive kernel patchs, it
was way better and I had only overruns at 115200 bauds.

With the 2.6.17.7 kernel (configured with CONFIG_PREEMPT and
CONFIG_HZ=1000), I'm seeing overruns starting at 38400 bauds. So
compared to plain 2.4, it's better. However compared to the patched
2.4, it's worse.

(the figures are *very approximative* as the overruns haven't been
detected with the same test conditions on 2.4 and on 2.6)

I have no result with the 2.6.17.7 patched with the real time patch of
Ingo/Thomas since it currently doesn't work on my card (see my separate
bugreport).

(those questions may have been directed to Lee but I'll respond in my case
as well)
> Are you using the low_latency flag on the serial device?

I tried that option with the 2.4 kernel and it didn't improve the situation
at all, and I haven't retried it with the 2.6 yet. But I will do.

> What type of UART has been tested (16550? other?)

I'm using only 16550 and I have no choice here, it's an "off the shelf"
card.

> Are you seeing overruns or just lost data?

I'm seeing overruns.

Regards,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-08-17 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-08-16 10:45 How to avoid serial port buffer overruns? Raphael Hertzog
2006-08-16 14:31 ` Lennart Sorensen
2006-08-16 14:57   ` Raphael Hertzog
2006-08-16 18:44 ` Lee Revell
2006-08-16 19:23   ` Paul Fulghum
2006-08-16 21:12     ` Lee Revell
2006-08-16 22:24       ` Paul Fulghum
2006-08-16 23:10         ` Russell King
2006-08-16 23:15           ` Lee Revell
2006-08-16 23:19             ` Russell King
2006-08-16 23:28               ` Lee Revell
2006-08-17  0:15                 ` R: " Giampaolo Tomassoni
2006-08-18  8:48                 ` Giampaolo Tomassoni
2006-08-18 17:00                   ` Lee Revell
2006-08-18 17:04                     ` Russell King
2006-08-18 17:30                       ` Lee Revell
2006-08-18 18:34                         ` Russell King
2006-08-18 18:52                           ` Lee Revell
2006-08-18 19:01                             ` Russell King
2006-08-18 19:07                               ` Russell King
2006-08-18 19:09                               ` Lee Revell
2006-08-17  9:20           ` Alan Cox
2006-08-17  9:28             ` Russell King
2006-08-17 11:57               ` Alan Cox
2006-08-17 13:29                 ` Paul Fulghum
2006-08-17 15:48                 ` Raphael Hertzog
2006-08-17 16:10         ` Raphael Hertzog [this message]
2006-08-17 16:40           ` Paul Fulghum
2006-08-18 19:31           ` Lee Revell
2006-08-23 12:45             ` Raphael Hertzog
     [not found] <fa.AByCsBI8k71hMVzCyQVimrLiDU4@ifi.uio.no>
2006-08-16 14:35 ` Robert Hancock
2006-08-16 14:42   ` Erik Mouw

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=20060817161042.GC10818@ouaza.com \
    --to=hertzog@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulkf@microgate.com \
    --cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.