From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dimitris Papastamos <dp@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ASoC: soc-cache: Add support for
 rbtree based register caching
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 09:38:35 +0000
Message-ID: <1288949915.8256.17.camel@dplaptop>
References: <1288880564-31957-1-git-send-email-dp@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
	<1288880564-31957-5-git-send-email-dp@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
	<20101104184948.GE6088@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org>
Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com
	[80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E78324373
	for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>; Fri,  5 Nov 2010 10:38:41 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20101104184948.GE6088@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
	<mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
	<mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com, Liam Girdwood <lrg@slimlogic.co.uk>
List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org

On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 14:49 -0400, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 02:22:44PM +0000, Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> 
> > This patch adds support for rbtree compression when storing the
> > register cache.  It does this by not adding any uninitialized registers
> > (those whose value is 0).  If any of those registers is written
> > with a nonzero value they get added into the rbtree.
> 
> > +	rbtree_ctx = codec->reg_cache;
> > +	for (node = rb_first(&rbtree_ctx->root); node; node = rb_next(node)) {
> > +		rbnode = rb_entry(node, struct snd_soc_rbtree_node, node);
> > +		if (!rbnode->dirty)
> > +			continue;
> > +		snd_soc_cache_read(codec, rbnode->reg, &val);
> > +		snd_soc_write(codec, rbnode->reg, val);
> > +		dev_dbg(codec->dev, "Synced register %#x, value = %#x\n",
> > +			rbnode->reg, val);
> 
> Hrm, dirty handling is kind of interesting.  It is unconditionally set
> in the write function and never cleared so we'll always rewrite a
> register if it's ever been touched.  Is it worth remembering the default
> values and just comparing with them, the memory overhead will probably
> be low since we only have one bitfield value here...  (and remember that
> we'll be unlikely to allocate memory in 21 byte packed hunks with no
> overhead...).

Yes, I have deliberately not cleared those bits because at the moment I
don't the default value of the register saved anywhere.  So what I will
do is, I will save the default value, and then I will only sync those
registers whose value differs from their default value.

Thanks,
Dimitrios