From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] sdhci: Move real work out of an atomic context Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 22:37:41 +0100 Message-ID: <20100908213740.GA7550@void.printf.net> References: <20100714130728.GA27339@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> <20100907153813.936db0c6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from void.printf.net ([89.145.121.20]:56914 "EHLO void.printf.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755468Ab0IHViT (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:38:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100907153813.936db0c6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: Anton Vorontsov , Wolfram Sang , Albert Herranz , Matt Fleming , Ben Dooks , Pierre Ossman , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Hi Andrew, On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 03:38:13PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > I noticed no throughput drop neither with PIO transfers nor > > with DMA (tested on MPC8569E CPU), while latencies should be > > greatly improved. > > This patchset isn't causing any problems yet, but may do so in the > future and will impact the validity of any testing. It seems to be > kind of stuck. Should I drop it all? I suggest keeping it -- I'll find time to test it out here soon, and will keep it in mind as a possible regression cause. Thanks, -- Chris Ball One Laptop Per Child