From: merez@codeaurora.org
To: Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@samsung.com>
Cc: "'S, Venkatraman'" <svenkatr@ti.com>,
linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
'Chris Ball' <cjb@laptop.org>, 'Maya Erez' <merez@codeaurora.org>,
'Subhash Jadavani' <subhashj@codeaurora.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v7 1/3] mmc: core: Add packed command feature of eMMC4.5
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:15:21 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <113bb1f38dbc386f1adfc580e10dc2e5.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000001cd489c$115f03b0$341d0b10$%jun@samsung.com>
> S, Venkatraman <svenkatr@ti.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@samsung.com>
>> wrote:
>> > This patch adds packed command feature of eMMC4.5.
>> > The maximum number for packing read(or write) is offered
>> > and exception event relevant to packed command which is
>> > used for error handling is enabled. If host wants to use
>> > this feature, MMC_CAP2_PACKED_CMD should be set.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@samsung.com>
>>
>> Can you please post some clear performance benchmarks with your patchset
>> ?
>> Given that #merez claims to see a significant performance drop for
>> reads, it will be
>> good to compare notes.
>> If it's not too much trouble, both CFQ and deadline scheduler figures
>> would be useful, on a
>> set of read only, write only and parallel read write usecases.
>>
>> I can also try to replicate your results if you can publish the exact
>> configuration you used
>> for testing (example: iozone parameters)
> I'm checking the merez's result.
> Currently packed command is effective on write.
> When running packed write with iozone, there is 25% performance gains.
> (ex: iozone -az -i0 -I -s 10m -f /target/test -e)
>
Our tests shows performance gain of 50-60% in scenarios of only write lmdd
operations.
As I mentioned in the write packing control thread the degradation of read
performance in case of mix read/write operations appears also without
write packing. Therefore I don't think it should stop us from approving
the write packing patch, that gives a significant improvement to the write
performance.
The read performance degradation should be resolved regardless of the
write packing patch.
Thanks,
Maya Erez
--
Sent by consultant of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-12 19:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-11 8:23 [PATCH v7 1/3] mmc: core: Add packed command feature of eMMC4.5 Seungwon Jeon
2012-06-11 20:26 ` merez
2012-06-12 3:12 ` Seungwon Jeon
2012-06-12 4:21 ` S, Venkatraman
2012-06-12 13:05 ` Seungwon Jeon
2012-06-12 19:15 ` merez [this message]
2012-06-13 19:49 ` S, Venkatraman
2012-06-13 21:43 ` merez
2012-06-14 3:10 ` Seungwon Jeon
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=113bb1f38dbc386f1adfc580e10dc2e5.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org \
--to=merez@codeaurora.org \
--cc=cjb@laptop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=subhashj@codeaurora.org \
--cc=svenkatr@ti.com \
--cc=tgih.jun@samsung.com \
/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).