All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Frias <sf84@laposte.net>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Cc: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>,
	linux-parport@lists.infradead.org, philb@gnu.org,
	tim@cyberelk.net, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com>,
	linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: True Parallel Port Interface for Bit-banging?
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 16:56:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <580F72AF.9070900@laposte.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161025142935.GA2875@katana>

On 10/25/2016 04:29 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> The virtualisation idea is not good then?
> 
> It is not that. I think good old DOSEMU could do that. Bit-Banging ports
> can be timing critical, though, and in this department virtualization
> solutions often fail.
> 

Thanks.
I understand your point, but I'm guessing that the big-banging routine (or the
protocol to be used) should be time-independent in order to run on different
real HW PCs, right? Otherwise a 386DX and a 486DX2 could behave differently,
right?

Or is the "timing issue" you talk about more related to unpredictable
latencies due to the way the SW virtualisation works?

What about emulation? Do you think emulation would be more predictable?

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-25 14:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-25 11:21 True Parallel Port Interface for Bit-banging? Sebastian Frias
2016-10-25 12:09 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-10-25 14:20   ` Sebastian Frias
2016-10-25 14:29     ` Wolfram Sang
2016-10-25 14:56       ` Sebastian Frias [this message]
2016-10-25 17:17         ` Wolfram Sang
2016-10-26  0:04         ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2016-10-26  5:20           ` [Linux-parport] " Jan Kandziora
2016-10-28 10:25           ` Sebastian Frias
2016-10-28 23:12             ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2016-11-07 12:44               ` Sebastian Frias
2016-11-07 23:53                 ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2016-10-25 13:22 ` Jean Delvare
2016-10-25 16:12   ` Sebastian Frias

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=580F72AF.9070900@laposte.net \
    --to=sf84@laposte.net \
    --cc=jdelvare@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-parport@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=philb@gnu.org \
    --cc=sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com \
    --cc=tim@cyberelk.net \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    /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.