From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Andy Gross <agross@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelf@ti.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
Subject: Re: Ideas/suggestions to avoid repeated locking and reducing too many lists with dmaengine?
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:24:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140225122424.GW27282@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140224205028.GA24339@qualcomm.com>
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 02:50:28PM -0600, Andy Gross wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 01:03:32PM -0600, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Just wanted your thoughts/suggestions on how we can avoid overhead in the EDMA
> > dmaengine driver. I am seeing a lots of performance drop specially for small
> > transfers with EDMA versus before raw EDMA was moved to DMAEngine framework
> > (atleast 25%).
>
> I've seen roughly the same drop in my testing. In my case it had to do
> with the nature of how work is done using virt-dma. The virt-dma is
> predicated on only letting one transaction be active at a time and it
> increases the latency for getting the next transaction off. For large
> transactions, it's negligible. But for small transactions, it is pretty
> evident.
Wrong. virt-dma allows you to fire off the next transaction in the queue
immediately that the previous transaction has finished. I know this,
because sa11x0-dma does exactly that.
You don't need to wait for the tasklet to be called before starting the
next transaction.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-25 12:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-24 19:03 Ideas/suggestions to avoid repeated locking and reducing too many lists with dmaengine? Joel Fernandes
2014-02-24 19:21 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-02-24 22:38 ` Joel Fernandes
2014-02-24 22:53 ` Joel Fernandes
2014-02-25 12:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-02-24 20:50 ` Andy Gross
2014-02-25 12:24 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
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=20140225122424.GW27282@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=agross@codeaurora.org \
--cc=joelf@ti.com \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vinod.koul@intel.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).