Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 08:36:28 -0500 From: Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com> To: ian j hart <ianjhart@ntlworld.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HP Laserjet 1200 on USB Message-ID: <87brtfmvj7.fsf@strauser.com> In-Reply-To: <200309201340.02453.ianjhart@ntlworld.com> (ian j. hart's message of "Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:40:02 %2B0100") References: <87fzisoi53.fsf@strauser.com> <20030920034256.GA59401@k7.mavetju> <20030920035139.GB59401@k7.mavetju> <200309201340.02453.ianjhart@ntlworld.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-=-= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 2003-09-20T12:40:02Z, ian j hart <ianjhart@ntlworld.com> writes: > 2) > What makes you think USB will be faster? The bottleneck is almost certain= ly=20 > the print engine. esp. in graphics mode. It currently takes about 5 minutes to transfer a 20MB file to my printer which has 64MB of memory. Printing starts within 5-10 seconds of the upload being completed. If the parallel port is in interrupt mode, CPU is pegged to 100% the whole time. In polled mode, CPU usage drops, but the printing time doesn't decrease (and the ``parallel'' process is running the whole time). That's what made me think that the parallel port is probably the bottleneck. =2D-=20 Kirk Strauser --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/bFfi5sRg+Y0CpvERAngcAJ96w+9YG6jlqhDJ1nue85IWBUAv8wCfdDZs PuXpMUcNwC1MZ+RAqGjLDdQ= =EEZJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?87brtfmvj7.fsf>