From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Bastien Curutchet <bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>,
Christopher Cordahi <christophercordahi@nanometrics.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: rawnand: davinci: Reduce polling interval in NAND_OP_WAITRDY_INSTR
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 17:12:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a5crabz3.fsf@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241219-patch-nand-poll-v2-1-cc80a1ee4e0f@bootlin.com> (Bastien Curutchet's message of "Thu, 19 Dec 2024 15:58:10 +0100")
Hello Bastien,
On 19/12/2024 at 15:58:10 +01, Bastien Curutchet <bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com> wrote:
> For each NAND_OP_WAITRDY_INSTR operation, the NANDFSR register is
> polled only once every 100 us to check for the EMA_WAIT pin. This
> isn't frequent enough and causes delays in NAND accesses.
>
> Set the polling interval to 0s. It increases the page read speed
> reported by flash_speed by ~40% (~30% on page writes).
...
> case NAND_OP_WAITRDY_INSTR:
> timeout_us = instr->ctx.waitrdy.timeout_ms * 1000;
> ret = readl_relaxed_poll_timeout(info->base + NANDFSR_OFFSET,
> - status, status & BIT(0), 100,
> + status, status & BIT(0), 0,
This kind of optimization is very tempting but has an impact on the
system. I am fine reducing this polling delay, but maybe not down to 0
which means you busy wait the entire time. For reads it might be fine
because tR is rather short, but for writes it is a bit more impacting
and for erases it will have a true system wide impact. So what you see
in the benchmark is specific to the NAND driver performances, but fails
to give you the system-wide big picture which I think is worth keeping
in mind.
As this value will be NAND specific we cannot fine tune it too much, but
I would suggest to try finding a lower value without reaching 0. Like 5
or 10 us maybe.
Thanks,
Miquèl
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-19 16:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-19 14:58 [PATCH v2] mtd: rawnand: davinci: Reduce polling interval in NAND_OP_WAITRDY_INSTR Bastien Curutchet
2024-12-19 16:12 ` Miquel Raynal [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=87a5crabz3.fsf@bootlin.com \
--to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com \
--cc=christophercordahi@nanometrics.ca \
--cc=herve.codina@bootlin.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.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