From: per.forlin@linaro.org (Per Forlin)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v6 02/11] omap_hsmmc: add support for pre_req and post_req
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 22:18:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=AgOmwkJkVAON5AFTr+ytqkAGP4w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1106211515270.2142@xanadu.home>
On 21 June 2011 21:18, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011, Per Forlin wrote:
>
>> On 21 June 2011 07:41, Kishore Kadiyala <kishorek.kadiyala@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> >> +
>> >> +static void omap_hsmmc_pre_req(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_request *mrq,
>> >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?bool is_first_req)
>> >
>> > I don't see the usage of "is_first_req" below.
>> > Is it required?
>> >
>> It is not required. It is only an indication that this request is the
>> first in a series of request. The host driver may do various
>> optimisations based on this information. The first request in a series
>> of jobs can't be prepared in parallel to the previous job. The host
>> driver can do the following to minimise latency for the first job.
>> ?* Preparing the cache while the MMC read/write cmd is being
>> processed. In this case the pre_req could do nothing and the job is
>> instead run in parallel to the read/write cmd being sent. If the
>> is_first_req is false pre_req will run in parallel to an active
>> transfer, in this case it is more efficient to prepare the request in
>> pre_req.
>> ?* Run PIO mode instead of DMA
>
> That is never going to be a good tradeoff. ?If the CPU is busy doing
> PIO, it won't have a chance to prepare a subsequent request in parallel
> to the first transfer.
>
If you have two CPUs and the MMC interrupts are scheduled on the CPU
1, CPU 0 can prepare the next one. I'm still in favor of the preparing
cache in parallel to cmd. I have run tests and for small req like 4k
there is a good performance gain. Another option, if the mmc
controller support it, would be to start with PIO and switch to DMA on
the fly when cache is ready. Bottom line, it is up to the host driver
to do something clever based on is_first_req.
/Per
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-21 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-19 21:17 [PATCH v6 00/11] mmc: use nonblock mmc requests to minimize latency Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 01/11] mmc: add non-blocking mmc request function Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 02/11] omap_hsmmc: add support for pre_req and post_req Per Forlin
2011-06-21 5:41 ` Kishore Kadiyala
2011-06-21 6:51 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-21 13:56 ` Kishore Kadiyala
2011-06-21 19:18 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-06-21 20:18 ` Per Forlin [this message]
2011-06-21 20:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 03/11] mmci: implement pre_req() and post_req() Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 04/11] mmc: mmc_test: add debugfs file to list all tests Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 05/11] mmc: mmc_test: add test for non-blocking transfers Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 06/11] mmc: add member in mmc queue struct to hold request data Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 07/11] mmc: add a block request prepare function Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 08/11] mmc: move error code in mmc_block_issue_rw_rq to a separate function Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 09/11] mmc: add a second mmc queue request member Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 10/11] mmc: test: add random fault injection in core.c Per Forlin
2011-06-19 21:17 ` [PATCH v6 11/11] mmc: add handling for two parallel block requests in issue_rw_rq Per Forlin
2011-06-20 15:17 ` Kishore Kadiyala
2011-06-21 6:40 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-21 7:05 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-21 13:52 ` Kishore Kadiyala
2011-06-21 21:01 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-21 7:14 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-21 7:53 ` [PATCH v6 00/11] mmc: use nonblock mmc requests to minimize latency Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-21 8:09 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-21 9:26 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-23 13:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-24 8:58 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-27 9:42 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-27 10:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-27 10:21 ` Per Forlin
2011-06-27 15:29 ` Linus Walleij
2011-06-27 16:34 ` Vijaya Kumar K-1
2011-06-27 10:34 ` saeed bishara
2011-06-27 11:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-28 6:22 ` saeed bishara
2011-07-03 14:47 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
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='BANLkTi=AgOmwkJkVAON5AFTr+ytqkAGP4w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=per.forlin@linaro.org \
--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).