From: Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@gmail.com>
To: "Paul G. Allen" <pgallen@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux Serial Performance
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:51:38 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B49168A.9050201@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bd8e30a41001091057t97f90abgffe9cca329ace477@mail.gmail.com>
On 01/09/2010 12:57 PM, Paul G. Allen wrote:
> I have been working on an application for work written in Java. It's a
> production system used for loading firmware into embedded devices via
> RS-232. It is designed to load multiple devices in parallel (tested
> with up to 32 on a machine thus far). With another Java application
> running on Windows XP, a single unit would take about 1 min to load
> ~400,000 byte binary image. I ported this code to the production
> system on Linux and it took over 15 min to load a single unit.
>
> I ran some tests on Windows XP and Linux CentOS 5.1 using the Sun
> NetBeans IDE 6.7.1 profiler. The same Java code on both Linux and XP
> machines, the same model of machine (Dell, Pentium 4 3GHz, 2.5GB
> memory). I am using the Sun comm API currently, and previously I was
> using the Serlio API. In all cases, the profiler shows the serial Tx
> to be about 20x faster (twenty times) on Windows XP than in Linux. It
> takes Linux several seconds to Tx 1024 byte blocks of data over the
> serial port where Windows XP takes a fraction of a second. I had also
> noticed that Linux seemed to be very slow in 2006-2007 when using
> Fedora (can't recall which version) and the Serialio API, but at that
> time I could not get Windows to work at all. This has forced us to
> lean toward the use of Windows (and pay for licensing for multiple
> machines, etc.) instead of Linux for every system that will be used in
> testing and manufacture of our product.
>
> 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?
It seems unlikely that there's a kernel bottleneck of this magnitude in
the serial code for something that simple. Seems more likely to me that
the Java VM's serial communications code is doing something silly. Have
you tried running strace on your process to see if the syscalls
accessing the serial port look strange? What's the CPU usage like when
this is running?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-09 23:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-09 18:57 Linux Serial Performance Paul G. Allen
2010-01-09 19:10 ` Samuel Thibault
2010-01-09 19:32 ` Paul G. Allen
2010-01-09 19:46 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2010-01-09 19:47 ` Michael Trimarchi
2010-01-09 20:30 ` Alan Cox
2010-01-09 23:51 ` Robert Hancock [this message]
2010-01-10 18:26 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2010-01-10 19:42 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2010-01-14 18:35 ` Paul G. Allen
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=4B49168A.9050201@gmail.com \
--to=hancockrwd@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pgallen@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox