home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!news.udel.edu!bach.udel.edu!radel
- From: radel@bach.udel.edu (Todd Radel)
- Subject: Re: 57.6Kbps under Linux -- some results...
- Message-ID: <BuH8E9.Ftz@news.udel.edu>
- Sender: usenet@news.udel.edu
- Nntp-Posting-Host: bach.udel.edu
- Organization: University of Delaware
- References: <!nwn!6h.harp@netcom.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 17:54:09 GMT
- Lines: 29
-
- In article <!nwn!6h.harp@netcom.com> harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp) writes:
- >BTW, the reason I keep saying 16550A and not just 16550 is because a
- >glance at the code tells me that Linux is only enabling the FIFO if
- >the UART is the 16550A (refer to lines 265-272 of serial.c). Linus,
- >can you tell us why you don't use the FIFO on the 16550? I've
- >personally never used the FIFO because my projects were for 16450
- >UARTs, but I'm not aware of any problems.
-
- The reason is that the original NS16550 (without the "A" designation)
- had some serious bugs in the buffer routines. Thus, most comm programs
- (including QModem and most FOSSIL drivers under DOS), and apparently
- Linux as well, are smart enough not to even bother.
-
- I don't remember the symptoms exactly, but I think that in certain
- situations (e.g. 38.4Kbps and above) the buffers would overrun, causing
- the chip to lock up. Or something like that -- please correct me if
- I'm wrong. There was a discussion recently on comp.dcom.modems about
- this.
-
- Nobody sells the plain 16550 anymore -- in fact, NS tried to recall
- every single chip it sold, so I doubt whether anyone's still using
- them, especially since NS16550AFN's are down to $10 apiece.
-
-
- --
- Todd Radel | "I obscenity in the milk of all," Agustin said,
- CIS/English undergrad | "if it does not seem like a lunatic asylum in
- University of Delaware | here." -- Hemingway, _For Whom the Bell Tolls_
- A.I. duPont Institute, 1600 Rockland Road, Wilmington, DE 19899
-