All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: khali@linux-fr.org (Jean Delvare)
To: Hinko Kocevar <hinko.kocevar@cetrtapot.si>
Cc: LM Sensors <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [lm-sensors] Re: I2C block reads with i2c-viapro: testers wanted
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 18:56:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050811185651.0ca4cd96.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42FA89FE.9050101@cetrtapot.si>

Hi Hinko,

> > Could you try running "i2cdump 0 0x50" and "i2cdump 0 0x50 i" (with
> > the patch still applied), and compare both the outputs and the time
> > each command takes? You should see similar outputs, but the second
> > command should be magnitudes faster. This would confirm that the I2C
> > block mode works as intended on your VT8233 chip.
> 
> Hmm, not really. Here it takes 6 seconds for the first test nad about
> 5 seconds  for the second test (I just read the WARNING - need to
> substract 5s from the  results...).

With a recent version of i2cdump (2.8.8 or later), you can use the -y
flag, which will skip this delay. This is very convenient for timing
tests.

That being said...

> noa xtrm # time i2cdump 0 0x50
> (...)
> real	0m6.033s
> (...)
> noa xtrm # time i2cdump 0 0x50 i
> (...)
> real	0m5.174s

This is 1.033s down to 0.174s. This is just great, I2C block reads work
and allow faster dumps, as expected.

> while simple cat takes a lot less time:
> noa xtrm # time dd if=/sys/bus/i2c/devices/0-0050/eeprom bs=4

This goes through the eeprom driver, which has an internal cache, so the
results are not suitable for timing comparisons.

Thanks a lot for the testing again :)
-- 
Jean Delvare

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Hinko Kocevar <hinko.kocevar@cetrtapot.si>
Cc: LM Sensors <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: I2C block reads with i2c-viapro: testers wanted
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 18:56:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050811185651.0ca4cd96.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42FA89FE.9050101@cetrtapot.si>

Hi Hinko,

> > Could you try running "i2cdump 0 0x50" and "i2cdump 0 0x50 i" (with
> > the patch still applied), and compare both the outputs and the time
> > each command takes? You should see similar outputs, but the second
> > command should be magnitudes faster. This would confirm that the I2C
> > block mode works as intended on your VT8233 chip.
> 
> Hmm, not really. Here it takes 6 seconds for the first test nad about
> 5 seconds  for the second test (I just read the WARNING - need to
> substract 5s from the  results...).

With a recent version of i2cdump (2.8.8 or later), you can use the -y
flag, which will skip this delay. This is very convenient for timing
tests.

That being said...

> noa xtrm # time i2cdump 0 0x50
> (...)
> real	0m6.033s
> (...)
> noa xtrm # time i2cdump 0 0x50 i
> (...)
> real	0m5.174s

This is 1.033s down to 0.174s. This is just great, I2C block reads work
and allow faster dumps, as expected.

> while simple cat takes a lot less time:
> noa xtrm # time dd if=/sys/bus/i2c/devices/0-0050/eeprom bs=4

This goes through the eeprom driver, which has an internal cache, so the
results are not suitable for timing comparisons.

Thanks a lot for the testing again :)
-- 
Jean Delvare

  reply	other threads:[~2005-08-11 18:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-08-09 21:13 I2C block reads with i2c-viapro: testers wanted Jean Delvare
2005-08-09 23:13 ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2005-08-10 20:31 ` Hinko Kocevar
2005-08-10 22:32   ` [lm-sensors] " Hinko Kocevar
2005-08-10 21:06   ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-10 23:06     ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2005-08-10 22:23     ` Martin Drab
2005-08-11  0:25       ` Martin Drab
2005-08-11 17:12       ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 19:12         ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-10 23:13     ` Hinko Kocevar
2005-08-11  1:13       ` [lm-sensors] " Hinko Kocevar
2005-08-11 16:56       ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2005-08-11 18:56         ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 19:13         ` Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-11 21:14           ` [lm-sensors] " Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-11 19:59           ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 21:59             ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 21:39             ` Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-11 23:40               ` [lm-sensors] " Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-11 21:49               ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 23:49                 ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 22:08                 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-12  0:08                   ` [lm-sensors] " Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-12  6:26                   ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-12  8:26                     ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2005-08-12 15:29                     ` Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-12 17:30                       ` [lm-sensors] " Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-12 17:58                       ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-12 19:58                         ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2005-08-12  1:07 ` [lm-sensors] " Mark M. Hoffman
2005-08-12  3:08   ` Mark M. Hoffman
2005-08-12  6:02   ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-12  8:02     ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-13  4:28 ` Mark M. Hoffman
2005-08-13  8:46 ` Jean Delvare
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-08-10  1:55 Salah Coronya
2005-08-10  5:56 ` [lm-sensors] " Salah Coronya
2005-08-10 10:06 ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-10 12:15   ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 18:30 Nick Warne

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20050811185651.0ca4cd96.khali@linux-fr.org \
    --to=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=hinko.kocevar@cetrtapot.si \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.