Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!network.ucsd.edu!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!decwrl!decwrl!netcomsv!netcom.com!jtk From: jtk@netcom.com (Jane Valencia) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: best lp drivers? Message-ID: <1992Nov2.172704.14626@netcom.com> Date: 2 Nov 92 17:27:04 GMT References: <1992Oct31.064801.5423@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> <1992Nov2.093110.12375@autelca.ascom.ch> Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Lines: 17 nbladt@autelca.ascom.ch (Norbert Bladt) writes: >Performance will degrade if you are not using interrupts, but poll instead. This is what you call intuition, something to be careful about when making global statements about performance. In the case of these drivers, the non-interrupt-driven one uses LESS CPU, at least in my measurements. This is because it does the user->kernel->user transition less often, because it moves more data to the printer on each transition. Between this fact AND Mr. Bladt's correct statement about many parallel ports not interrupting correctly, I would suggest using the non-interrupt lpt driver unless some overwhelming issue stops you. Andy Valencia jtk@netcom.com