From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/12] use nonblock mmc requests to minimize latency Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 18:09:45 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1309539333-2606-1-git-send-email-per.forlin@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from void.printf.net ([89.145.121.20]:56692 "EHLO void.printf.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754704Ab1GIWJz (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jul 2011 18:09:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1309539333-2606-1-git-send-email-per.forlin@linaro.org> (Per Forlin's message of "Fri, 1 Jul 2011 18:55:21 +0200") Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Per Forlin Cc: linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, Nicolas Pitre , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, "S, Venkatraman" Hi Per, On Fri, Jul 01 2011, Per Forlin wrote: > How significant is the cache maintenance over head? > It depends, the eMMC are much faster now > compared to a few years ago and cache maintenance cost more due to > multiple cache levels and speculative cache pre-fetch. In relation the > cost for handling the caches have increased and is now a bottle neck > dealing with fast eMMC together with DMA. Thanks very much, I've pushed v9 of the patchset to mmc-next for 3.1 (after fixing some merge conflicts against Adrian Hunter's recent patches and rewording some of the commit message texts). - Chris. -- Chris Ball One Laptop Per Child