Re: Slow spi_sync() on pxa2xx_spi

[Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Stefan Schmidt
<stefan@datenfreihafen.org> wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 17:44, Eric Miao wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Stefan Schmidt
> > <stefan@datenfreihafen.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Its either 8bit or 16bit for a message. The mentioned problem happens
> > > on a 8 bit message. It does nothing else then writing to a defined
> > > register address to trigger the hardware sending the data in the FIFO.
> >
> > This might get too much overhead. I didn't check the source code, but
> > my guess is it's waiting for interrupt for each message, and once the
> > interrupt of message being flushed out happens, it starts the next one
> > waiting for the FIFO empty interrupt coming. Did you try stuff more
> > bytes into a single message?
>
> Took me some time to implement and test al kind of different
> scenarios. As you suggested I tried to stuff more bytes into a message
> as well as testing all kind of combination with tx and rx thresholds,
> timout, PIO and DMA, cs_change , etc. No change.
>
> I then bit the bullet and changed the board to use the spi_gpio driver
> instead of pxa2xx. After some struggling (make sure you setup pin
> config correctly :)) I got it working but with the same result.
>
> My last test block was around using spi_async() instead of spi_sync
> and as well I was not able to reach my timing criteria. :(
>
> To me it seems right now as if it is just not possible to reach
> something in the 100 usec range with the SPI framework. Obviuously I
> would be loved to be proven wrong. :)
>
> As I'm running way out of time for this part of my project I'm back to
> the driver now trying to find a solution that avoids the tight timing
> criteria.

I think for a time budget like this, you may want to try a dedicated
polling driver avoid all the interrupt/wait stuff, that's going to maximize
the throughput. If that's even not possible, it might be HW limitations.

>
> Eric, thanks again for your fast and helpfull mails.

No problem, most welcome.

>
> regards
> Stefan Schmidt