On Monday 10 June 2013 17:23:46 Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Oliver Neukum <oli...@neukum.org> wrote:
> > On Sunday 09 June 2013 23:18:28 Ming Lei wrote:
> >> 2), the biggest change is the situation in which usb_submit_urb() is called
> >> in complete() callback, so the introduced tasklet schedule delay might be a
> >> con, but it shouldn't be a big deal:
> >>
> >> - control/bulk asynchronous transfer isn't sensitive to schedule
> >> delay
> >
> > That is debatable.Missing a frame boundary is expensive because the
> > increased
> > latency then translates into lower throughput.
>
> Suppose so, considered that bulk transfer will do large data block transfer,
> and
> the extra frame or uFrame doesn't matter over the whole transfer time.
That is not true for all use cases. Networking looks vulnerable.
Regards
Oliver
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
