Mick Barry wrote:
>
> Oliver Rauch wrote:
>
> >> What was the original idea behind implementing the second process in
> >> some of the backends?
> >
> >
> > The idea is to make the data flow between scanner and backend
> > independant from the data flow between backend and frontend.
> >
> > But this also can be done by intelligent scsi command handling
> > and may be also by good usb command handling.
> >
> > Bye
> > Oliver
>
> What about implementing an (optional) wrapper around the backend to make
> the flow between the f/e and the b/e independant of the flow between
> scanner and b/e.
No. That is bad. sane_read of all backends have to be independant
of the backend <-> scanner data flow.
May be we should write some sanei_* routines that can be used by
all backends. As long as the data is transfered via the generic
scsi functions it should always be possible to initiate a read
command without having to wait until it is finished. May be
already this does make sane_read independant (enough) from the
scanner<->backend data flow. If command queueing is available
I think we will get better results than with the reader_processes.
Bye
Oliver
-- Homepage: http://www.rauch-domain.de sane-umax: http://www.rauch-domain.de/sane-umax xsane: http://www.xsane.org E-Mail: mailto:Oliver.Rauch@rauch-domain.de-- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/ To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 09:31:32 PDT