ioctl alternative (linux)

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Nico Coesel, Feb 23, 2012.

  1. Nico Coesel

    Nico Coesel Guest

    I'm looking for a faster alternative to talk to a device driver. I
    noticed every ioctl call takes about 20ms. This is way too slow for my
    purpose. Any hints?
    Nico Coesel, Feb 23, 2012
    1. Advertisements

  2. Nico Coesel

    Joe Pfeiffer Guest

    First hint would be to take it to a Linux group. This one is about the
    C programming language.

    Second would be to give some more details: why is it too long? Is this
    a driver you're writing, or one that is part of your distribution?
    Joe Pfeiffer, Feb 23, 2012
    1. Advertisements

  3. Nico Coesel

    Jorgen Grahn Guest

    [Followup-To: comp.os.linux.development.system]

    Like comp.os.linux.development.system. Followup set.
    One reflection: 20 ms seems insanely long, unless this is some
    extremely low-powered embedded system. I know I've done ioctl's at a
    rate of 1e+05 to 1e+06 per second or so on recent-ish PC hardware --
    and these ioctls also did plenty of work. (Not that I think it's a
    good idea to do system calls at this insane rate, but I couldn't
    change the design.)

    Jorgen Grahn, Feb 23, 2012
  4. Nico Coesel

    Nico Coesel Guest

    I tried to find one but most of the Linux groups appear to be 'dead'.
    I found the problem. A sleep (which shouldn't be there) in one of the
    drivers was the culprit.
    Nico Coesel, Feb 24, 2012
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.