This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [PATCH]: Fix ser-go32.c for UARTs with FIFOs.

To: jtc at redback dot com
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Fix ser-go32.c for UARTs with FIFOs.
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at delorie dot com>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:38:38 -0500 (EST)
CC: ac131313 at cygnus dot com, fpastor dot etra-id at etra dot es, gdb-patches at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010204094707.20547Q-100000@is> <3A7F6BCF.605B1D7F@cygnus.com> <6137-Tue06Feb2001105337+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <004f01c09034$e7aa2300$0500a8c0@etra.es> <3A804C5F.9F2B6D84@cygnus.com> <5mitmnsik8.fsf@jtc.redback.com>
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>

> From: jtc@redback.com (J.T. Conklin)
> Date: 06 Feb 2001 11:44:07 -0800
> 
> Eli mentioned that he didn't think the speed gain from using OUTS 
> vs. OUT was significant.

My reasoning was that the current CPUs can run circles around any UART
anyway, so even with OUTS you will most of the time wait for the UART
to finish transmitting.

> If that is really the case, why not use the conservative approach
> and always use OUT?

Yes, that was what I meant to do.  Except that I don't like to remove
old code all of a sudden, so I kinda deprecated it with an #ifdef.

References:
- [PATCH]: Fix ser-go32.c for UARTs with FIFOs.
  - From: Eli Zaretskii
- Re: [PATCH]: Fix ser-go32.c for UARTs with FIFOs.
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- RE: [PATCH]: Fix ser-go32.c for UARTs with FIFOs.
  - From: Francisco Pastor
- Re: [PATCH]: Fix ser-go32.c for UARTs with FIFOs.
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: [PATCH]: Fix ser-go32.c for UARTs with FIFOs.
  - From: J.T. Conklin

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]