Juergen Sauer wrote: > > Am Freitag, 23. November 2001 00:19 schrieben Sie: > > option enable-image-buffering > > Somewhat thing was what I'm looking for. > > It is not nessessary to have the same Device-Bandwith to the ram as with > SCSI. Scanning time is not important. My topic is more to save the > scanner's mechanical lifietime. > > But this did not helped here. > During preview scan xsane .81+ sane 1.06 I recognize a ugly misbehavior: > the scanner moves forward-stop-little backward-stop- etc. instead of > moving counitnuesly until buffer full - stop transfer - go on. > > This behavior sounds like a cruel mechanical torture - HP's hardware > quality is not the same as for a few years, this way the scanner will > probably break soon. > > Any idea what's going on there - any idea ? Since none of the USB experts seems to be available at present, here my $0.02. (disclaimer: I haven't ever even connected any USB device to a Linux box...)
Below is a copy from a recent mail to the Sane list. In another mail you wrote that you use an SMP kernel. Assuming that the Epson scanners use the same USB <-> SCSI "translation" as HP scanners, it might help to try a non-SMP kernel. Abel > Subject: Re: [sane-devel] S..L..O..W USB Scanning with Epson 1650 > Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 11:11:37 -0500 > From: "Justin S. Peavey" <jpeavey+sanede...@peaveynet.com> > To: sane-de...@mostang.com > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 09:50:02AM -0500, Justin S. Peavey wrote to To > sane-de...@mostang.com: > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 07:11:26PM -0500, Karl Heinz Kremer wrote to Cc > sane-de...@mostang.com: > > > I read your post on the usb group, and your suspicion that this problem > > > is caused by the USB subsystem is very likely correct. The scan times > > > you are listing are definitely not right. You should get about the > > > same times as you list for the Windows driver. I suspect that it has > > > to do with your dual CPU setup. > > > > > > Sorry, but I can not help to solve this problem. > > > > > > Karl Heinz > > > > > > > I'm going to try a non-SMP kernel tonight to see if that does > > anything. The other thing that is tickling my mind is the shared > > interrupts, USB, SCSI, and Network card all sharing the same one. I > > understand this is much more common now, but the problem looks similar > > to a slowly or mis-handled interrupt. Anyone know how to force USB to > > it's own interrupt? > > > > -JSP > > > > On the nose Karl, the scanning works fine when I boot with a non-SMP > kernel. I'll continue this on the linux-usb group. Thanks for your > help! > > -JSP
