On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Yuri Tikhonov <y...@emcraft.com> wrote:
> The reason why I preferred to use async_pq() instead of async_xor()
> here is to maximize the chance that the whole D+D recovery operation
> will be handled in one ADMA device, i.e. without channels switch and
> the latency introduced because of that.
>
This should be a function of the async_tx_find_channel implementation.
The default version tries to keep a chain of operations on one
channel.
struct dma_chan *
__async_tx_find_channel(struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *depend_tx,
enum dma_transaction_type tx_type)
{
/* see if we can keep the chain on one channel */
if (depend_tx &&
dma_has_cap(tx_type, depend_tx->chan->device->cap_mask))
return depend_tx->chan;
return dma_find_channel(tx_type);
}
--
Dan
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
