Re: [avrdude-dev] Bad programming speed on AT90S8535 using AVRdude

[Theodore A. Roth]

> > Attached is what I think should be committed. It's trivial to add
> > the sched_yield() call if someone thinks that is really needed.
>
> Looks good to me.  IMHO, I don't think it's all that important to be
> nice and call sched_yield().  Most folks using AVRDUDE are using it on
> their own personal system, not shared with others.  Also, the OS can
> switch us out based on its own scheduling algorithms.  And on top of
> that, if someone finds that other processes are sluggish while running
> AVRDUDE, they can always 'nice' it when they invoke it.

Ok, I've committed the patch. I made a small comment only change, from
this:

+      gettimeofday (&tv, NULL);
+      start_time = (tv.tv_sec * 1000000) + tv.tv_usec;
+      do {
+        /*
+         * Do polling, but don't wait (much) longer than max_write_delay
+         * Granularity might need some tuning for best performance.
+        */
+        rc = avr_read_byte(pgm, p, mem, addr, &r);

changed to this:

+      gettimeofday (&tv, NULL);
+      start_time = (tv.tv_sec * 1000000) + tv.tv_usec;
+      do {
+        /*
+         * Do polling, but timeout after max_write_delay.
+        */
+        rc = avr_read_byte(pgm, p, mem, addr, &r);

>
> And besides, with these changes we may be able to claim one of the
> faster programming times :-) Did you get a chance to try the test
> using the STK500 for comparison?  Should be real close now.

Didn't do that test. Will have to wait until I get home from work as the
only boards I have here that can use the stk200 have mega128's in them.

Ted Roth