Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer
From: thor@tordivel.no (Thor Vollset)
Subject: Re: Transputer and Coherent UNIX
Organization: TORDIVEL AS, Oslo, Norway
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 94 10:20:09 +0100
Message-ID: <Zu0XuAMHBh107h@tordivel.no>

In <9408242721@fangorn> Michael Haardt <(michael)u31b3hs@pool.informatik.rwth-aachen.de> writes:
>thor@tordivel.no (Thor Vollset) writes:

>>> An implementation in a high level language in not very much more than 200 lines.
>>> And with a 486 class computer the slow interface speed of B004 means that assembly language
>>> is not necessary.

>>Ok, which peak performance do you get and which machine do you use?
>>Let's say block size 1024 bytes.  I use Linux on a 486-40, with a
>>device driver which uses assembler, and I get 269KB/sec on reading and
>>382KB/sec on writing to the transputer link.  To me, assembler is needed
>>here, or it would be even less.

>The code is implemented an MS-Windows DLL. 
>I believe I get about 150 kByte/s on 486 - 33 peak performance, but
>in my implementation that is more than enough. I use the transputer as an
>embedded controller with no transferRate bottle-neck

>With an engineering approach I am not the person that twist & tweaks performance.

>>I have a b004 compatible board (no DMA) with a 20MBit/sec link and I am
>>not using interrupts.  I suppose your device driver uses the Timeout
>>code to allow task scheduling? I missed code to support a timeout on
>>reading and writing, which allows a program to catch error conditions.

>That code was not included.
>The purpose was just to supply a part of the code as an simple example.

-- 
*****************************************************************
* Thor Vollset (thor@tordivel.no)                               *
* TORDIVEL AS  Waldemar Thranes gate 77  N-0175 OSLO  NORWAY    *
* phone +47 22 20 68 90  fax +47 22 20 68 91                    *
*****************************************************************

