From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 17:42:44 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v4 0/5] mtd: pxa3xx_nand: rework the timing setup In-Reply-To: References: <1445416144-9194-1-git-send-email-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> <20151022171259.57581575@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20151022174244.61eaf79e@free-electrons.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Dear Ezequiel Garcia, On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:22:24 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > Could you compare NAND throughput using keep-config (keeping > the bootloader timings) and without keep-config (with ONFI timings) ? Seems like we are within the measurement noise. I did each test only once, and the test lasts only a few seconds, but here are the results: Without keep-config (i.e ONFI timings) : # time dd if=/dev/mtd3 of=/dev/null bs=1M 32+0 records in 32+0 records out real 0m 3.54s user 0m 0.00s sys 0m 0.26s With keep-config (i.e bootloader timings) # time dd if=/dev/mtd3 of=/dev/null bs=1M 32+0 records in 32+0 records out real 0m 3.77s user 0m 0.00s sys 0m 0.21s I.e we are apparently slightly faster with the ONFI timings. However again, the test duration is very short, and I didn't repeat the test several times. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com