All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
To: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
	Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: nand_op_parser_exec_op should use longest pattern
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 10:21:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190330102134.4e85e130@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bc75ec7a12c681a618ee641736141100@agner.ch>

+Miquel

On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 15:37:56 +0100
Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> wrote:

> On 29.03.2019 14:35, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > I just played with the new exec_op interface for the first time and
> > together with Boris we found a problem in the pattern table parser.
> > 
> > The vf610 driver uses this pattern table:
> > 
> > static const struct nand_op_parser vf610_nfc_op_parser = NAND_OP_PARSER(
> > 	NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(vf610_nfc_cmd,
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(true, 5),
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_OUT_ELEM(true, PAGE_2K + OOB_MAX),
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(true)),
> > 	NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(vf610_nfc_cmd,
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(true, 5),
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(true),
> > 		NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_IN_ELEM(true, PAGE_2K + OOB_MAX)),
> > 	);
> > 
> > It has two patterns, one supposed for writing and one for reading. All elements
> > are optional. Now with a typical page read we'll get this:
> > 
> > [   33.932464] nand:     ->CMD      [0x00]
> > [   33.936338] nand:     ->ADDR     [5 cyc: 00 00 00 0a 00]
> > [   33.941755] nand:     ->CMD      [0x30]
> > [   33.945628] nand:     ->WAITRDY  [max 1 ms]
> > [   33.949909] nand:       DATA_IN  [2176 B]
> > 
> > Only the first four elements are executed in one go, the fifth is
> > exectuted separately. This is because the pattern table parser finds
> > that the first pattern (supposed for writing) already matches for the
> > first four elements and then uses it instead of realizing that the
> > second pattern matches the whole operation.  
> 
> Hm, I do not remember noticing that during development. I wonder if it
> was the case already back then.
> 
> If yes, it did not seem to have a negative impact on performance
> compared to the old interface:
> https://linux-mtd.infradead.narkive.com/qZgEnPsC/patch-v6-0-3-mtd-rawnand-vf610-nfc-make-use-of-exec-op
> 
> > 
> > I have no fix for this, just wanted to let you know. It turned out that
> > in my case for the GPMI nand driver I probably won't need any pattern
> > table.  
> 
> Thanks for bringing it up! Will try it out when I come around.

Here is a new version of the proposed fix that compiles, at
least :-). Still not tested tested on a real HW though.

--->8---
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
index ddd396e93e32..7a5178b5f13e 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
@@ -2131,6 +2131,23 @@ static void nand_op_parser_trace(const struct nand_op_parser_ctx *ctx)
 }
 #endif
 
+static int nand_op_parser_cmp_ctx(const struct nand_op_parser_ctx *a,
+                                 const struct nand_op_parser_ctx *b)
+{
+
+       if (a->subop.ninstrs < b->subop.ninstrs)
+               return -1;
+       else if (a->subop.ninstrs > b->subop.ninstrs)
+               return 1;
+
+       if (a->subop.last_instr_end_off < b->subop.last_instr_end_off)
+               return -1;
+       else if (a->subop.last_instr_end_off > b->subop.last_instr_end_off)
+               return 1;
+
+       return 0;
+}
+
 /**
  * nand_op_parser_exec_op - exec_op parser
  * @chip: the NAND chip
@@ -2165,30 +2182,38 @@ int nand_op_parser_exec_op(struct nand_chip *chip,
        unsigned int i;
 
        while (ctx.subop.instrs < op->instrs + op->ninstrs) {
-               int ret;
+               const struct nand_op_parser_pattern *pattern;
+               struct nand_op_parser_ctx best_ctx;
+               int ret, best_pattern = -1;
 
                for (i = 0; i < parser->npatterns; i++) {
-                       const struct nand_op_parser_pattern *pattern;
+                       struct nand_op_parser_ctx test_ctx = ctx;
 
                        pattern = &parser->patterns[i];
-                       if (!nand_op_parser_match_pat(pattern, &ctx))
+                       if (!nand_op_parser_match_pat(pattern, &test_ctx))
                                continue;
 
-                       nand_op_parser_trace(&ctx);
+                       if (best_pattern >= 0 &&
+                           nand_op_parser_cmp_ctx(&test_ctx, &best_ctx) <= 0)
+                               continue;
 
-                       if (check_only)
-                               break;
+                       best_pattern = i;
+                       best_ctx = test_ctx;
+               }
 
+               if (best_pattern < 0) {
+                       pr_debug("->exec_op() parser: pattern not found!\n");
+                       return -ENOTSUPP;
+               }
+
+               ctx = best_ctx;
+               nand_op_parser_trace(&ctx);
+
+               if (!check_only) {
+                       pattern = &parser->patterns[best_pattern];
                        ret = pattern->exec(chip, &ctx.subop);
                        if (ret)
                                return ret;
-
-                       break;
-               }
-
-               if (i == parser->npatterns) {
-                       pr_debug("->exec_op() parser: pattern not found!\n");
-                       return -ENOTSUPP;
                }
 
                /*

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

  reply	other threads:[~2019-03-30  9:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-29 13:35 nand_op_parser_exec_op should use longest pattern Sascha Hauer
2019-03-29 13:57 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-03-29 14:37 ` Stefan Agner
2019-03-30  9:21   ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2019-04-08 20:00     ` Stefan Agner
2019-04-08 21:30       ` Miquel Raynal
2019-04-16 21:22       ` Miquel Raynal

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=20190330102134.4e85e130@collabora.com \
    --to=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=stefan@agner.ch \
    /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.