On Fri, 9 Feb 2001, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > I also propose to increase the size of flip buffer to 640 bytes (so the
> > > flipping won't occur every time in the middle of the full buffer), however
> > > I understand that it's a rather drastic change for such a simple goal, and
> > > not every
Hi!
> > I also propose to increase the size of flip buffer to 640 bytes (so the
> > flipping won't occur every time in the middle of the full buffer), however
> > I understand that it's a rather drastic change for such a simple goal, and
> > not everyone will agree that it's worth the trouble:
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Joe deBlaquiere wrote:
> >>I'm a little confused here... why are we overrunning? This thing is
> >> running externally at 19200 at best, even if it does all come in as a
> >> packet.
> >
> >
> > Different Merlin -- original Merlin is 19200, "Merlin for Ricochet" is
>
Alex Belits wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Joe deBlaquiere wrote:
>
>
>> Hi Alex!
>>
>> I'm a little confused here... why are we overrunning? This thing is
>> running externally at 19200 at best, even if it does all come in as a
>> packet.
>
>
> Different Merlin -- original Merlin i
How does this relate to IrDA with SIR speed of 115200 and max turnaround
of 500ms?
The max throughput is about 5000 bytes in 500ms.
Garst
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.or
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Joe deBlaquiere wrote:
> Hi Alex!
>
> I'm a little confused here... why are we overrunning? This thing is
> running externally at 19200 at best, even if it does all come in as a
> packet.
Different Merlin -- original Merlin is 19200, "Merlin for Ricochet" is
128Kbp
Hi Alex!
I'm a little confused here... why are we overrunning? This thing is
running externally at 19200 at best, even if it does all come in as a
packet. I would think the flip buffer would never contain more than a
few characters. Are you running it at a higher rate internally? Does
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I also propose to increase the size of flip buffer to 640 bytes (so the
> > flipping won't occur every time in the middle of the full buffer), however
> > I understand that it's a rather drastic change for such a simple goal, and
> > not everyone will agr
> I also propose to increase the size of flip buffer to 640 bytes (so the
> flipping won't occur every time in the middle of the full buffer), however
> I understand that it's a rather drastic change for such a simple goal, and
> not everyone will agree that it's worth the trouble:
Going to a 1
9 matches
Mail list logo
