From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Hinko Kocevar <hinko.kocevar@cetrtapot.si>
Cc: LM Sensors <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: I2C block reads with i2c-viapro: testers wanted
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 18:56:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050811185651.0ca4cd96.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42FA89FE.9050101@cetrtapot.si>
Hi Hinko,
> > Could you try running "i2cdump 0 0x50" and "i2cdump 0 0x50 i" (with
> > the patch still applied), and compare both the outputs and the time
> > each command takes? You should see similar outputs, but the second
> > command should be magnitudes faster. This would confirm that the I2C
> > block mode works as intended on your VT8233 chip.
>
> Hmm, not really. Here it takes 6 seconds for the first test nad about
> 5 seconds for the second test (I just read the WARNING - need to
> substract 5s from the results...).
With a recent version of i2cdump (2.8.8 or later), you can use the -y
flag, which will skip this delay. This is very convenient for timing
tests.
That being said...
> noa xtrm # time i2cdump 0 0x50
> (...)
> real 0m6.033s
> (...)
> noa xtrm # time i2cdump 0 0x50 i
> (...)
> real 0m5.174s
This is 1.033s down to 0.174s. This is just great, I2C block reads work
and allow faster dumps, as expected.
> while simple cat takes a lot less time:
> noa xtrm # time dd if=/sys/bus/i2c/devices/0-0050/eeprom bs=4
This goes through the eeprom driver, which has an internal cache, so the
results are not suitable for timing comparisons.
Thanks a lot for the testing again :)
--
Jean Delvare
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-11 16:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-09 21:13 I2C block reads with i2c-viapro: testers wanted Jean Delvare
2005-08-10 20:31 ` Hinko Kocevar
2005-08-10 21:06 ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-10 22:23 ` [lm-sensors] " Martin Drab
2005-08-11 17:12 ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-10 23:13 ` Hinko Kocevar
2005-08-11 16:56 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2005-08-11 19:13 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-11 19:59 ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 21:39 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-11 21:49 ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-11 22:08 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-12 6:26 ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-12 15:29 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2005-08-12 17:58 ` Jean Delvare
2005-08-12 1:07 ` [lm-sensors] " Mark M. Hoffman
2005-08-12 6:02 ` Jean Delvare
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-08-10 1:55 Salah Coronya
2005-08-10 10:06 ` Jean Delvare
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=20050811185651.0ca4cd96.khali@linux-fr.org \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=hinko.kocevar@cetrtapot.si \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
/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