public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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