From: Nick Thompson <nick.thompson@ge.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] DaVinci: Improve DaVinci SPI speed.
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:14:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C1A49E4.4050309@ge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0554BEF07D437848AF01B9C9B5F0BC5D9E9C6C64@dlee01.ent.ti.com>
On 17/06/10 16:10, Paulraj, Sandeep wrote:
>
>
>>
>> On 01/06/10 12:36, Delio Brignoli wrote:
>>> I have updated this patch based on the comments [1] by Wolfgang Denk and
>>> removed unused variables.
>>> [1][http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-May/071728.html]
>>>
>>> Reduce the number of reads per byte transferred on the BUF register from
>> 2 to 1 and
>>> take advantage of the TX buffer in the SPI module. On LogicPD OMAP-L138
>> EVM,
>>> SPI read throughput goes up from ~0.8Mbyte/s to ~1.3Mbyte/s. Tested with
>> a 2Mbyte image file.
>>> Remove unused variables in the spi_xfer() function.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Delio Brignoli <dbrignoli@audioscience.com>
>>> Tested-by: Ben Gardiner <bengardiner@nanometrics.ca>
>>
>> Sorry, I'm a bit late to the party on this.
>
> It is late. Pull request already sent to Wolfgang
>>
>> I have an alternative patch that tries to be even quicker, but I
>> don't have the same platform as Delio, so can't compare like with
>> like.
>
> Compare it on your platform. I believe you have the OMAP L137.
> And post the results.
I don't have a scope to get an accurate measure. The best I can do
right now is use a serial snooper to time between me pressing return
and the next prompt turning up.
To try and drown out inaccuracies and delays, I ran:
sf read 0xc0008000 0 0x800000
So 8MiB in a reasonably consistent 5.62 - 5.63 seconds, which is about
1.49MiB/s by my reckoning. A bit faster, but way short of 6.25MiB/s.
Nick.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-17 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-01 11:36 [U-Boot] [PATCH] DaVinci: Improve DaVinci SPI speed Delio Brignoli
2010-06-01 13:51 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-06-07 19:30 ` Paulraj, Sandeep
2010-06-07 21:17 ` Paulraj, Sandeep
2010-06-08 8:36 ` Delio Brignoli
2010-06-17 15:02 ` Nick Thompson
2010-06-17 15:10 ` Paulraj, Sandeep
2010-06-17 16:14 ` Nick Thompson [this message]
2010-06-17 17:38 ` Delio Brignoli
2010-06-18 8:26 ` Nick Thompson
2010-06-18 8:49 ` Wolfgang Wegner
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-05-13 12:57 [U-Boot] [PATCH] " Delio Brignoli
2010-05-21 13:15 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH] DaVinci: " Ben Gardiner
2010-05-21 13:18 ` Ben Gardiner
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=4C1A49E4.4050309@ge.com \
--to=nick.thompson@ge.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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