[sane-devel] UMAX Astra 2200sc: slow calibration

[Oliver Rauch]

Hello.

Is your scanner connected via scsi or via usb?

I suggest to disable "quality calibration".
Then the calibration is done inside the scanner
without the help of the driver. When there is no
dust on the calibration area then there is no
quality problem with "quality calibration" disabled.

For some people the quality calibration with the 2200SU
seems to work, for most people it does not work.
But I was not able to find out when it does work
and when it does not work.

Please can you tell me which firmeare version your scanner
uses!

Best regards
Oliver

Am Son, 2005-07-17 um 17.07 schrieb Tony van der Hoff:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm able to obtain a scan from my Astra 2200, but it is taking in excess of
> 30 minutes to do so, the vast majority of this time reading 64 lines of
> shading data at 2 lines/minute.
> 
> I've modified the debug output to include time information, and the relevant
> extract from the log is as follows:
> 
> 14:52:13 [umax] scanner ready
> 14:52:13 [umax] driver is doing calibration
> 14:52:13 [umax] request sense call is disabled
> 14:52:13 [umax] scanner sends 64 lines with 15300 pixels and 2 bytes/pixel
> 14:52:13 [umax] calculating average value for 16 bit shading data (low byte
> first)!
> 14:52:13 [umax] read_shading_data
> 14:52:13 [umax] umax_scsi_cmd: calling sanei_scsi_cmd
> 14:52:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_cmd
> 14:52:13 [sanei_scsi] scsi_req_enter: entered 0x80b63c8
> 14:52:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi.issue: 0x80b63c8
> dev_max(currently)=32 max_active_device=5 (origin 1)
>  def_reserved_size=32768
>  >>> device=sg3 scsi1 chan=0 id=5 lun=0   em=0 sg_tablesize=128 excl=1
>    FD(1): timeout=120000ms bufflen=34304 (res)sgat=2 low_dma=0
>    cmd_q=1 f_packid=0 k_orphan=0 closed=0
>      rb>> act: id=17 blen=30600 t_o/elap=120000/13ms sgat=0 op=0x28
> 14:52:13 [sanei_scsi] scsi_req_enter: queue_used: 1, queue_max: 2
> 14:52:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: waiting for 0x80b63c8
> 14:52:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi.issue: 0x80b63c8
> dev_max(currently)=32 max_active_device=5 (origin 1)
>  def_reserved_size=32768
>  >>> device=sg3 scsi1 chan=0 id=5 lun=0   em=0 sg_tablesize=128 excl=1
>    FD(1): timeout=120000ms bufflen=34304 (res)sgat=2 low_dma=0
>    cmd_q=1 f_packid=0 k_orphan=0 closed=0
>      rb>> rcv: id=17 blen=30600 dur=60276ms sgat=0 op=0x28
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: read 64 bytes
> 14:53:13 [umax] 16 bit shading-line 1 read
> 14:53:13 [umax] read_shading_data
> 14:53:13 [umax] umax_scsi_cmd: calling sanei_scsi_cmd
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_cmd
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] scsi_req_enter: entered 0x80b63c8
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi.issue: 0x80b63c8
> dev_max(currently)=32 max_active_device=5 (origin 1)
>  def_reserved_size=32768
>  >>> device=sg3 scsi1 chan=0 id=5 lun=0   em=0 sg_tablesize=128 excl=1
>    FD(1): timeout=120000ms bufflen=34304 (res)sgat=2 low_dma=0
>    cmd_q=1 f_packid=0 k_orphan=0 closed=0
>      rb>> act: id=18 blen=30600 t_o/elap=120000/14ms sgat=0 op=0x28
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] scsi_req_enter: queue_used: 1, queue_max: 2
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: waiting for 0x80b63c8
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi.issue: 0x80b63c8
> dev_max(currently)=32 max_active_device=5 (origin 1)
>  def_reserved_size=32768
>  >>> device=sg3 scsi1 chan=0 id=5 lun=0   em=0 sg_tablesize=128 excl=1
>    FD(1): timeout=120000ms bufflen=34304 (res)sgat=2 low_dma=0
>    cmd_q=1 f_packid=0 k_orphan=0 closed=0
>      rb>> rcv: id=18 blen=30600 dur=24ms sgat=0 op=0x28
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: read 64 bytes
> 14:53:13 [umax] 16 bit shading-line 2 read
> 14:53:13 [umax] read_shading_data
> 14:53:13 [umax] umax_scsi_cmd: calling sanei_scsi_cmd
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_cmd
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] scsi_req_enter: entered 0x80b63c8
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi.issue: 0x80b63c8
> dev_max(currently)=32 max_active_device=5 (origin 1)
>  def_reserved_size=32768
>  >>> device=sg3 scsi1 chan=0 id=5 lun=0   em=0 sg_tablesize=128 excl=1
>    FD(1): timeout=120000ms bufflen=34304 (res)sgat=2 low_dma=0
>    cmd_q=1 f_packid=0 k_orphan=0 closed=0
>      rb>> act: id=19 blen=30600 t_o/elap=120000/12ms sgat=0 op=0x28
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] scsi_req_enter: queue_used: 1, queue_max: 2
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: waiting for 0x80b63c8
> 14:53:13 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi.issue: 0x80b63c8
> 
> and so on, until
> 
> 15:24:23 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: read 64 bytes
> 15:24:23 [umax] 16 bit shading-line 63 read
> 15:24:23 [umax] read_shading_data
> 15:24:23 [umax] umax_scsi_cmd: calling sanei_scsi_cmd
> 15:24:23 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_cmd
> 15:24:23 [sanei_scsi] scsi_req_enter: entered 0x80b63c8
> 15:24:23 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi.issue: 0x80b63c8
> dev_max(currently)=32 max_active_device=5 (origin 1)
>  def_reserved_size=32768
>  >>> device=sg3 scsi1 chan=0 id=5 lun=0   em=0 sg_tablesize=128 excl=1
>    FD(1): timeout=120000ms bufflen=34304 (res)sgat=2 low_dma=0
>    cmd_q=1 f_packid=0 k_orphan=0 closed=0
>      rb>> act: id=80 blen=30600 t_o/elap=120000/13ms sgat=0 op=0x28
> 15:24:23 [sanei_scsi] scsi_req_enter: queue_used: 1, queue_max: 2
> 15:24:23 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: waiting for 0x80b63c8
> 15:24:23 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi.issue: 0x80b63c8
> dev_max(currently)=32 max_active_device=5 (origin 1)
>  def_reserved_size=32768
>  >>> device=sg3 scsi1 chan=0 id=5 lun=0   em=0 sg_tablesize=128 excl=1
>    FD(1): timeout=120000ms bufflen=34304 (res)sgat=2 low_dma=0
>    cmd_q=1 f_packid=0 k_orphan=0 closed=0
>      rb>> rcv: id=80 blen=30600 dur=23ms sgat=0 op=0x28
> 15:24:23 [sanei_scsi] sanei_scsi_req_wait: read 64 bytes
> 15:24:23 [umax] 16 bit shading-line 64 read
> 15:24:23 [umax] send_shading_data
> 
> After that it rapidly performs the scan, and exits.
> 
> Despite my best efforts, I don't understand the driver at this level, so is
> there anyone out there who can make some suggestions on my next step in
> debugging this issue, please?
> 
> Is the fact that it's taking almost exactly 60 seclonds to read two lines of
> data significant?
> 
> FWIW, I'm running linux kernel 2.6.8, and have similar results with 2.6.11
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -- 
> Tony van der Hoff         | mailto:tony at vanderhoff.org
> Buckinghamshire, England