linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/5] mmc: add double buffering for mmc block requests
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 20:36:00 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110205203600.GA31760@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110205170255.GG29411@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 05:02:55PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 07:13:58PM +0100, Per Forlin wrote:
> > Add support to prepare one MMC request while another is active on
> > the host. This is done by making the issue_rw_rq() asynchronous.
> > The increase in throughput is proportional to the time it takes to
> > prepare a request and how fast the memory is. The faster the MMC/SD is
> > the more significant the prepare request time becomes. Measurements on U5500
> > and U8500 on eMMC shows significant performance gain for DMA on MMC for large
> > reads. In the PIO case there is some gain in performance for large reads too.
> > There seems to be no or small performance gain for write, don't have a good
> > explanation for this yet.
> 
> It might be worth seeing what effect the following patch has.  This
> moves the dsb out of the cache operations into a separate function,
> so we only do one dsb per DMA mapping/unmapping operation.  That's
> particularly significant for the scattergather code.
> 
> I don't remember the reason why this was dropped as a candidate for
> merging - could that be because the dsb needs to be before the outer
> cache maintainence?  Adding Catalin for comment on that.

FWIW, trying this with MMC on OMAP4, I see no measurable difference in
performance nor CPU usage.

      reply	other threads:[~2011-02-05 20:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-01-12 18:13 [PATCH 0/5] mmc: add double buffering for mmc block requests Per Forlin
2011-01-12 18:13 ` [PATCH 1/5] mmc: add member in mmc queue struct to hold request data Per Forlin
2011-01-12 18:14 ` [PATCH 2/5] mmc: Add a block request prepare function Per Forlin
2011-01-12 18:14 ` [PATCH 3/5] mmc: Add a second mmc queue request member Per Forlin
2011-01-12 18:14 ` [PATCH 4/5] mmc: Store the mmc block request struct in mmc queue Per Forlin
2011-01-12 18:14 ` [PATCH 5/5] mmc: Add double buffering for mmc block requests Per Forlin
2011-01-12 18:24 ` [PATCH 0/5] mmc: add " Per Forlin
2011-01-18  2:35 ` Jaehoon Chung
2011-01-18  8:12   ` Per Forlin
2011-01-28  8:28     ` Per Forlin
2011-01-30  8:23       ` Jaehoon Chung
2011-02-05 17:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-05 20:36   ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]

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=20110205203600.GA31760@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).