From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: per.forlin@linaro.org (Per Forlin) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:22:34 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] mmc: mxs-mmc: add support for pre_req and post_req In-Reply-To: <20110420140120.GF1965@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> References: <1302116833-24540-1-git-send-email-per.forlin@linaro.org> <1303058010-30256-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org> <20110417164830.GE17935@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> <20110420140120.GF1965@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 20 April 2011 16:01, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:01:22AM +0200, Per Forlin wrote: >> On 17 April 2011 18:48, Shawn Guo wrote: >> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:33:30AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: >> >> pre_req() runs dma_map_sg() post_req() runs dma_unmap_sg. >> >> If not calling pre_req() before mxs_mmc_request(), request() >> >> will prepare the cache just like it did it before. >> >> It is optional to use pre_req() and post_req(). >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo >> >> --- >> >> ?drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c | ? 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> >> ?1 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> >> > >> > Here is the result of mmc_test case 37 ~ 40, which are designed to see >> > the performance improvement introduced by non-blocking changes. >> > >> > Honestly, the improvement is not so impressive. ?Not sure if the patch >> > for mxs-mmc pre_req and post_req support was correctly produced. ?So >> > please help review ... >> My guess is that dma_unmap is not run in parallel with transfer. >> Please look at my patch reply. >> > Got it fixed in v2 posted just now. ?Please take another look. > Unfortunately, I do not see noticeable difference than v1 in terms > of mmc_test result. > > Do you have omap_hsmmc and mmci mmc_test result data to share? > I keep the here: https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/Kernel/Specs/StoragePerfMMC-async-req > -- > Regards, > Shawn > > /Per