From: prylowski@metasoft.pl (Rafal Prylowski)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ep93xx: Implement double buffering for M2M DMA channels
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 11:00:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F6AF845.9070209@metasoft.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F6A78ED.3050403@gmail.com>
On 2012-03-22 01:57, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> I haven't looked through the patch yet, since I'm waiting on more
> information from Mika and Hartley's testing.
>
> However, the commit log doesn't tell me why we want this change. Is it a
> performance improvement? If so, do you have some numbers that we can
> paste into the commit log?
In principle, using double buffering should be faster than using only
one buffer and disabling/enabling channel each time. But my measurements
doesn't show any significant change.
The real reason for this change is that current code is not 100% reliable
in IDE-DMA (I'm planning to submit ep93xx ide driver to linux-ide soon).
Although using only one buffer and DONE interrupt is simple, surprisingly
we can get interrupt when M2M DMA is in DMA_BUF_ON and DMA_STALL state.
If we disable the channel at this moment, we end with ata timeout.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-22 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-20 8:09 [PATCH] ep93xx: Implement double buffering for M2M DMA channels Rafal Prylowski
2012-03-21 7:07 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-21 7:47 ` Rafal Prylowski
2012-03-21 19:33 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-21 17:12 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-03-21 19:32 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-22 0:47 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-03-22 7:37 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-22 18:52 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-03-22 20:03 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-22 21:36 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-03-22 23:56 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-03-23 7:00 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-22 10:16 ` Rafal Prylowski
2012-03-21 19:38 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-23 2:19 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-03-23 7:04 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-23 16:09 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-03-24 7:32 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-03-26 6:44 ` Rafal Prylowski
2012-03-29 22:33 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-04-01 18:49 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-04-10 17:28 ` Mika Westerberg
2012-04-10 17:55 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-04-11 7:18 ` Rafal Prylowski
2012-04-16 18:59 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-04-17 7:15 ` Rafal Prylowski
2012-04-17 15:46 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-04-17 20:51 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-04-18 16:41 ` Rafal Prylowski
2012-04-18 17:01 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2012-03-22 0:57 ` Ryan Mallon
2012-03-22 10:00 ` Rafal Prylowski [this message]
2012-03-22 13:14 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2012-03-22 14:13 ` Rafal Prylowski
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=4F6AF845.9070209@metasoft.pl \
--to=prylowski@metasoft.pl \
--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).