From: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com>
To: Philip Rakity <prakity@marvell.com>
Cc: Per Forlin <per.forlin@linaro.org>,
"linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org>,
Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] mmc: use nonblock mmc requests to minimize latency
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 13:28:09 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DCB61D9.5050508@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5D6BC6C8-D3C6-4987-B8AF-523A500D8309@marvell.com>
Hi Philip..
I have something question..did you test SDMA and ADMA?
Actually i didn't test [patch v3] but i tested patch v2 before Per sent.
I got that SDMA is faster than ADMA. (using bounce buffer and sdhci)
How do you think about that? I want to know your thought.
And if you can share the results, i want to know them.
Regards,
Jaehoon Chung
Philip Rakity wrote:
> On May 9, 2011, at 5:34 AM, Per Forlin wrote:
>
>> On 9 May 2011 04:05, Philip Rakity <prakity@marvell.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Per,
>>>
>>> We noticed on some of our systems if we ADMA or SDMA and a bounce buffer it is significantly faster then SDMA.
>>>
>> I have not done work with ADMA or SDMA. Where should I look to read
>> more about it?
>> Are these the right places. DMA iop-dma.c and imx-sdma.c, MMC: sdhci.c.
>
> sdhci.c for ADMA and SDMA
>
> spec is at
> http://www.sdcard.org/developers/tech/sdcard/pls/simplified_specs/
>
> version 3 discusses ADMA
>
>>> I believe ADMA will do large transfers. Another data point.
>>>
>>> Philip
>> Thanks,
>> Per
>>
>>> On May 7, 2011, at 12:14 PM, Per Forlin wrote:
>>>
>>>> How significant is the cache maintenance over head?
>>>> It depends, the eMMC are much faster now
>>>> compared to a few years ago and cache maintenance cost more due to
>>>> multiple cache levels and speculative cache pre-fetch. In relation the
>>>> cost for handling the caches have increased and is now a bottle neck
>>>> dealing with fast eMMC together with DMA.
>>>>
>>>> The intention for introducing none blocking mmc requests is to minimize the
>>>> time between a mmc request ends and another mmc request starts. In the
>>>> current implementation the MMC controller is idle when dma_map_sg and
>>>> dma_unmap_sg is processing. Introducing none blocking mmc request makes it
>>>> possible to prepare the caches for next job parallel with an active
>>>> mmc request.
>>>>
>>>> This is done by making the issue_rw_rq() none blocking.
>>>> The increase in throughput is proportional to the time it takes to
>>>> prepare (major part of preparations is dma_map_sg and dma_unmap_sg)
>>>> a request and how fast the memory is. The faster the MMC/SD is
>>>> the more significant the prepare request time becomes. Measurements on U5500
>>>> and Panda on eMMC and SD shows significant performance gain for for large
>>>> reads when running DMA mode. In the PIO case the performance is unchanged.
>>>>
>>>> There are two optional hooks pre_req() and post_req() that the host driver
>>>> may implement in order to move work to before and after the actual mmc_request
>>>> function is called. In the DMA case pre_req() may do dma_map_sg() and prepare
>>>> the dma descriptor and post_req runs the dma_unmap_sg.
>>>>
>>>> Details on measurements from IOZone and mmc_test:
>>>> https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/Kernel/Specs/StoragePerfMMC-async-req
>>>>
>>>> Under consideration:
>>>> * Make pre_req and post_req private to core.c.
>>>> * Generalize implementation and make it available for SDIO.
>>>>
>>>> Changes since v2:
>>>> * Fix compile warnings in core.c and block.c
>>>> * Simplify max transfer size in mmc_test
>>>> * set TASK_RUNNING in queue.c before issue_req()
>>>>
>>>> Per Forlin (12):
>>>> mmc: add none blocking mmc request function
>>>> mmc: mmc_test: add debugfs file to list all tests
>>>> mmc: mmc_test: add test for none blocking transfers
>>>> mmc: add member in mmc queue struct to hold request data
>>>> mmc: add a block request prepare function
>>>> mmc: move error code in mmc_block_issue_rw_rq to a separate function.
>>>> mmc: add a second mmc queue request member
>>>> mmc: add handling for two parallel block requests in issue_rw_rq
>>>> mmc: test: add random fault injection in core.c
>>>> omap_hsmmc: use original sg_len for dma_unmap_sg
>>>> omap_hsmmc: add support for pre_req and post_req
>>>> mmci: implement pre_req() and post_req()
>>>>
>>>> drivers/mmc/card/block.c | 493 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>>>> drivers/mmc/card/mmc_test.c | 340 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>> drivers/mmc/card/queue.c | 180 ++++++++++------
>>>> drivers/mmc/card/queue.h | 31 ++-
>>>> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 132 ++++++++++-
>>>> drivers/mmc/core/debugfs.c | 5 +
>>>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 146 +++++++++++-
>>>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.h | 8 +
>>>> drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c | 90 +++++++-
>>>> include/linux/mmc/core.h | 9 +-
>>>> include/linux/mmc/host.h | 13 +-
>>>> lib/Kconfig.debug | 11 +
>>>> 12 files changed, 1174 insertions(+), 284 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 1.7.4.1
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-12 4:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-07 19:14 [PATCH v3 00/12] mmc: use nonblock mmc requests to minimize latency Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:14 ` [PATCH v3 01/12] mmc: add none blocking mmc request function Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:14 ` [PATCH v3 02/12] mmc: mmc_test: add debugfs file to list all tests Per Forlin
2011-05-07 22:18 ` Andy Shevchenko
2011-05-08 13:12 ` Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:14 ` [PATCH v3 03/12] mmc: mmc_test: add test for none blocking transfers Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:14 ` [PATCH v3 04/12] mmc: add member in mmc queue struct to hold request data Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:14 ` [PATCH v3 05/12] mmc: add a block request prepare function Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:15 ` [PATCH v3 06/12] mmc: move error code in mmc_block_issue_rw_rq to a separate function Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:15 ` [PATCH v3 07/12] mmc: add a second mmc queue request member Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:15 ` [PATCH v3 08/12] mmc: add handling for two parallel block requests in issue_rw_rq Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:15 ` [PATCH v3 09/12] mmc: test: add random fault injection in core.c Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:15 ` [PATCH v3 10/12] omap_hsmmc: use original sg_len for dma_unmap_sg Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:15 ` [PATCH v3 11/12] omap_hsmmc: add support for pre_req and post_req Per Forlin
2011-05-07 19:15 ` [PATCH v3 12/12] mmci: implement pre_req() and post_req() Per Forlin
2011-05-09 2:05 ` [PATCH v3 00/12] mmc: use nonblock mmc requests to minimize latency Philip Rakity
2011-05-09 12:34 ` Per Forlin
2011-05-09 13:44 ` Philip Rakity
2011-05-12 4:28 ` Jaehoon Chung [this message]
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=4DCB61D9.5050508@samsung.com \
--to=jh80.chung@samsung.com \
--cc=cjb@laptop.org \
--cc=linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=per.forlin@linaro.org \
--cc=prakity@marvell.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