On Thursday 16 April 2009, Dan Streetman wrote: > I believe the issue is that in each uframe, the ordering is correct > (isoc then interrupt) but across uframes, during a single frame, there > is no logic to ensure all the isocs on the fullspeed bus are scheduled > before any of the interrupts. I do believe that this works in most > cases, it's just in some cases it's possible to misorder the CSPLITs, > as Alan said. Moving existing interrupts to later uframes may be > necessary. I see. Yes, that might need to change. And it would be a flavor of "rebalancing" too. ISTR thinking about biasing interrupt transfers for "late" in the frame, but may never have done much with that thought. To treat ISO frames that way it might be useful to add a new abstraction: a full speed view of that schedule tree. Maybe not; but, it might make for a simpler structure. Of course the very earliest code didn't much want to even share uframes... - Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
