From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp124.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.97]) by bombadil.infradead.org with smtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1K5m0C-0005tn-I4 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 18:21:57 +0000 From: David Brownell To: Haavard Skinnemoen Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.26-rc5-git] at91_nand speedup via {read, write}s{b, w}() Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 11:21:53 -0700 References: <200806090313.28515.david-b@pacbell.net> <200806091007.37494.david-b@pacbell.net> <20080609194859.3a9b5fcb@hskinnemo-gx745.norway.atmel.com> In-Reply-To: <20080609194859.3a9b5fcb@hskinnemo-gx745.norway.atmel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200806091121.53579.david-b@pacbell.net> Cc: Nicolas Ferre , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, lkml List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Monday 09 June 2008, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > > real    0m20.226s > > user    0m0.010s > > sys     0m6.000s > > Hmm, that's odd. What's the CPU doing during the remaining 14 seconds? > It can't possibly be sleeping? > > Ah, it's I/O wait, isn't it? Because you're going through the block > layer? Some of it is surely data copying, but yes /dev/mtdblock0 might have something to do with it. I was puzzled by this too, which is part of why I quoted only elapsed time. > Yeah...I'm still not sure where to send it though, since it touches > three different subsystems. I can set up a separate tree for it like > I've done a couple of times before...though I'm not sure if anyone ever > pulls it. Three subsystems ... you mean, ARM, AVR32, MTD? If MTD patches merged more promptly, I'd suggest it goes through there. Else maybe you should just get acks from the other maintainers and push the rename+ directly to Linus once 2.6.27-rc0 starts. - Dave