Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!easy!lron From: lron@easy.hiam.com (Dwight Hubbard) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm Subject: Re: 19200 baud amiga Message-ID: <18bf2954.ARN0e27@easy.hiam.com> Date: 27 Feb 91 07:05:40 GMT References: <2587@tmiuv0.uucp> <978@faatcrl.UUCP> <19116@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1022@faatcrl.UUCP> <19303@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1032@faatcrl.UUCP> Reply-To: lron@easy.hiam.com Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.datacomm Distribution: comp Organization: You must be talking about someone else. Lines: 19 Expires: Keywords: In article <1032@faatcrl.UUCP>, Jack Radigan writes: > daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: > > >Certainly a FIFO would be a good idea; they worked fine in the system level > >chips like the DMAC. Either a decent FIFO or a dedicated DMA channel like > >the floppy gets would solve the problem. > > Hope so, an A1000 can send at 38.4kbps very nicely, faster than my 12MHz > 286 PeeCee, in fact. But, it can't receive at that rate. Hope you can > squeeze a 4 byte FIFO in there, sure would be nice. I think a 4 byte FIFO would be insufficent, some of the Non-DMA drive controllers I've seen keep interupts disabled for up to a half a second and in that time period an HST can send 800+ bytes of data. A 4 byte FIFO isn't going to solve this problem. A dedicated DMA channel sounds like a more viable solution to this kind of problem. If a FIFO were used I would like to see at least a 16 byte one like the 16550 UARTS that PC owners have, although even a four byte FIFO would be better than what we have now. *----------------*--------------------------------* | Dwight Hubbard | UseNet: easy!lron@uunet.uu.net | | Kaneohe, HI | Genie: D.Hubbard1 | *----------------*--------------------------------*