Linux wireless drivers development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clarify pci_iomap() usage for MMIO-only devices
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:30:25 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709181323260.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43e72e890709181312sf2b421cn49be3389b3786a2a@mail.gmail.com>



On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> 
> An extra branch is created on MMIO-only devices on read/writes on the
> IO_COND macro using this interface -- or is this optimized out?

Umm. Does anybody actually have any performance numbers? 

The thing is, those things are *cheap* compared to the IO. And any 
high-performance device will be using DMA for the real IO, so we're not 
generally even talking about any performance-critical stuff. 

Quite frankly, if performance is a _real_ reason to avoid 
ioread*/iowrite*, I'll happily accept read*/write*, but it would be needed 
to be backed up by real numbers. Can you even measure it?

I would definitely *not* encourage the notion that people should use 
readl/writel because of "performance reasons". That may be valid for some 
fbcon driver, but those drivers go to other extremes (ie they use 
"__raw_writel()" etc, and MTRR's etc).

If you don't use write-combining memory regions, the performance argument 
is not really valid.

			Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2007-09-18 20:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-09-17 20:22 [PATCH] Clarify pci_iomap() usage for MMIO-only devices Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 10:34 ` Alan Cox
2007-09-18 18:46   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 19:03     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 19:07       ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 19:22         ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 20:12           ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 20:30             ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-09-18 21:02               ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2007-09-18 21:14                 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 21:30                   ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-18 21:42                     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 22:25                       ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 22:21               ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-09-18 22:36                 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 20:21           ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-18 22:20             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-09-18 23:08               ` Jeff Garzik
2007-09-18 23:27                 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-18 22:16       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-09-18 22:25       ` Alan Cox
2007-09-19 15:07         ` Nick Kossifidis

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=alpine.LFD.0.999.0709181323260.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=jeff@garzik.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=mcgrof@gmail.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