From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: rcar: add DMA support Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 23:35:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20160512213551.GA1641@katana> References: <1462365503-8451-1-git-send-email-niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se> <20160505220625.GA18367@rob-hp-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0F1p//8PRICkK4MW" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160505220625.GA18367@rob-hp-laptop> Sender: linux-renesas-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Niklas =?utf-8?Q?S=C3=B6derlund?= , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline > Is DMA actually faster or less cpu usage? I'm doubtful. No need to be faster at 100/400kHz :) The key here is way less interrupts for bigger transfers. The threshold value is hard to measure, however. --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJXNPc3AAoJEBQN5MwUoCm2rq8P/3V6/RHRLfC4iSWbFPEfsVYT CBWgccvl6CjHE6M7tIPpOho+ADh7V/edz9uUv41vbUyxRhafqU0S/HEL5u9+i0ep ymemGrZFO7CzzX/DYRX0RPBUH5PkMjFvr91EGO5hMZQoXo1D8mq0js7zL+MVwelT Eu0dtZVco5LIGov540XHJ64HmwtCkXE9HVd5034Ju8kUk+wkWdZZDckCaB+ZbtIq ownlprn9+Jn75Ng5oLVf0ZR6OIJ4JSHo68UWaikpB+9EhD+KwL07gF8eo2COGGr3 aSXap7GdFYP9A5R+0fPuk/dAgveoGqTYCegkmGp14tcjlX+SgCgLiktVVfDzkfaw HOcn8o4FPumsKODBXCv3zwhEywTvCfhHr5RdGiCjTo7eiFKz1ThnUVrJcaqS2xZ/ Ch5KnQrtI91DWZxI/bMX4gSBzlxy+OvC6nenjzTerxA24DUXTqYGh3/BIxBuXnCt zV1Da2yuYMiFgzO8jpUTqQB3pK9PUQPMoQfna5flxFwZjs/7ySKe4INSuObBexC5 gYnGBHPMJzkksKRGjtv0o2ZwEudtxS4SRtao4I3bUR44HEqkr/c5wnKuqIVHkNZN 1jOj/xJ4GoT7bNHm03Do0PXcDkJxLiPk1IhJ7DXytu/PLCLY0pZ59LiU7Rem6lwc ftt8pq0mFJ/ZjxDozWPO =xbcF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW--