RFC : usbatm and iso
rkagan at mail.ru
Tue Feb 8 15:07:58 EST 2005
On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 04:36:58PM +0100, matthieu castet wrote:
> I attached a patch for adding iso to the new library.
> Seem to work well but need more testing.
Just out of curiosity: does using of isochronous transfers improve
throughput compared to bulk? I'd be rather surprised if it does...
Re. your patch, I'm missing the point of having multiple iso urbs,
especially since you use an interval of 1. Why not use iso frames
within a single urb where the bulk version uses separate urbs?
Or am I saying something totally stupid?
More information about the Usbatm