From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, dwmw2@infradead.org,
michael.kreuzer@nsn.com, nico@fluxnic.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix a huge latency problem in the MTD CFI and LPDDR flash drivers.
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:03:24 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1272024204.6917.9.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1271623604.7050.0.camel@wall-e.seibold.net>
On Sun, 2010-04-18 at 22:46 +0200, Stefani Seibold wrote:
> From: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
>
> The use of a memcpy() during a spinlock operation will cause very long
> thread context switch delays if the flash chip bandwidth is low and the
> data to be copied large, because a spinlock will disable preemption.
>
> For example: A flash with 6,5 MB/s bandwidth will cause under ubifs,
> which request sometimes 128 KB (the flash erase size), a preemption delay of
> 20 milliseconds. High priority threads will not be served during this
> time, regardless whether this threads access the flash or not. This behavior
> breaks real time.
>
> The patch changes all the use of spin_lock operations for xxxx->mutex
> into mutex operations, which is exact what the name says and means.
>
> I have checked the code of the drivers and there is no use of atomic
> pathes like interrupt or timers. The mtdoops facility will also not be used
> by this drivers. So it is dave to replace the spin_lock against mutex.
>
> There is no performance regression since the mutex is normally not
> acquired.
>
> Changelog:
> 06.03.2010 First release
> 26.03.2010 Fix mutex[1] issue and tested it for compile failure
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c | 131 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
> drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c | 122 ++++++++++++++++----------------
> drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0020.c | 136 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
> drivers/mtd/chips/fwh_lock.h | 6 +-
> drivers/mtd/chips/gen_probe.c | 3 +-
> drivers/mtd/lpddr/lpddr_cmds.c | 79 ++++++++++----------
> include/linux/mtd/flashchip.h | 4 +-
> 7 files changed, 239 insertions(+), 242 deletions(-)
Pushed to l2-mtd-2.6.git / master.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-23 12:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-18 20:46 [PATCH] Fix a huge latency problem in the MTD CFI and LPDDR flash drivers Stefani Seibold
2010-04-20 18:16 ` Stefani Seibold
2010-04-23 6:03 ` Stefani Seibold
2010-04-23 3:07 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-28 13:58 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-04-23 12:03 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-26 10:36 stefani
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=1272024204.6917.9.camel@localhost \
--to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=michael.kreuzer@nsn.com \
--cc=nico@fluxnic.net \
--cc=stefani@seibold.net \
/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