Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:1992 comp.unix.microport:500
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!ncc!alberta!ubc-cs!grads.cs.ubc.ca!pajari
From: pajari@grads.cs.ubc.ca (George Pajari)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.unix.microport
Subject: Re: Do we need a serial I/O benchmark (BAUDSTONE)?
Message-ID: <2063@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Date: 15 Apr 88 12:32:54 GMT
References: <1974@ubc-cs.UUCP> <661@omen.UUCP>
Sender: nobody@ubc-cs.UUCP
Reply-To: pajari@grads.cs.ubc.ca (George Pajari)
Organization: UBC Department of Computer Science, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Lines: 24
Keywords: rs232 serial data communications benchmark

In <661@omen.UUCP>, caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) writes:

> A loopback configuration is next to useless for predicting the
> ability of a system to receive data at speed from external
> sources (other computers).

I don't agree.

First, if the test shows that at 9600 baud (8-N-1) 960 characters
per second were being transmitted and received, then you could
safely state that the board will accept 9600 baud input regardless
of the source.

Furthermore, I would claim that if the measured throughput were N 
characters per second, then one could have reasonable confidence 
that the system could handle input up to N * 10 baud.

(Obviously the key to the BAUDSTONE is to measure the number of characters
per second actually received.  You are quite correct in as much as
a 9600 loop-back test tells you nothing about the ability of the
system to accept 9600 baud input.  If you measure the actual character
throughput, however, you can draw some conclusions.)

George Pajari