From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 09:59:22 +0300 From: Baruch Siach To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] mtd: mxc_nand: fix truncate of unaligned oob copying Message-ID: <20150513065922.GN2558@tarshish> References: <20150508072432.GJ12671@pengutronix.de> <20150513051202.GI2558@tarshish> <20150513063903.GC28888@pengutronix.de> <20150513064404.GM2558@tarshish> <20150513064734.GF28888@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20150513064734.GF28888@pengutronix.de> Cc: Fabio Estevam , Brian Norris , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Sascha Hauer , Shawn Guo , David Woodhouse , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Uwe, On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 08:47:34AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 09:44:04AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote: > > > I thought we could get rid of the memcpy32 variants. Where do we need > > > memcpy32_* where memcpy16 wouldn't work? > > > > memcpy16 should work, but would take twice as much IO/memory accesses. That > > would definitely affect performance, as this is the flash data read/write hot > > path. I didn't test, though. > > > > Are you sure we want to do that? > no, I'm not sure. But I think it's worth to test how much performance > degrades. That will have to wait a few weeks as I don't have the hardware handy at the moment. baruch -- http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -