This patch can get the benefit of performance.
Looks good to me.
Tested-by: Jaehoon Chung
On 01/26/2012 04:32 PM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
> This patch implements pre_req and post_req in dw_mmc
> to support asynchronous mmc request.
>
> Signed-off-by: Seungwon Jeon
> ---
> Changes in v2:
>
>> > - Add a variable member in mmc_host for minimum number of packed
>> > entries.
>> > This value can be overridden by host.
>> Ah.. Okay~ I clearly understand about two queston.
>> Totally, Looks good to me.
>> Thanks for your reply.
>> And I heard that packed cmd is not good wh
This patch implements pre_req and post_req in dw_mmc
to support asynchronous mmc request.
Signed-off-by: Seungwon Jeon
---
Changes in v2:
Consider system DMA case as well as IDMAC.
NOTE:
Performance gains the following.
Sequential read and write improve 23% and 5% respectively.
Namjae Jeon :
> 2012/1/26 Seungwon Jeon :
> > Namjae Jeon :
> >> 2012/1/25 Namjae Jeon :
> >> >>> >> +
> >> >>> >> +static int mmc_blk_issue_packed_rd(struct mmc_queue *mq,
> >> >>> >> + struct mmc_queue_req *mq_rq)
> >> >>> >> +{
> >> >>> >> + struct mmc_blk_data *md = mq->data
2012/1/26 Seungwon Jeon :
> Namjae Jeon :
>> 2012/1/25 Namjae Jeon :
>> >>> >> +
>> >>> >> +static int mmc_blk_issue_packed_rd(struct mmc_queue *mq,
>> >>> >> + struct mmc_queue_req *mq_rq)
>> >>> >> +{
>> >>> >> + struct mmc_blk_data *md = mq->data;
>> >>> >> + struct mmc
Namjae Jeon :
> 2012/1/25 Namjae Jeon :
> >>> >> +
> >>> >> +static int mmc_blk_issue_packed_rd(struct mmc_queue *mq,
> >>> >> + struct mmc_queue_req *mq_rq)
> >>> >> +{
> >>> >> + struct mmc_blk_data *md = mq->data;
> >>> >> + struct mmc_card *card = md->queue.card;
> >>>
2012/1/25 Namjae Jeon :
>>> >> +
>>> >> +static int mmc_blk_issue_packed_rd(struct mmc_queue *mq,
>>> >> + struct mmc_queue_req *mq_rq)
>>> >> +{
>>> >> + struct mmc_blk_data *md = mq->data;
>>> >> + struct mmc_card *card = md->queue.card;
>>> >> + int status, ret =
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:39:06AM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:22:02AM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 09:58:00AM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > Sure. Which branch shall I take it against (before or after your amba
> > > changes)?
> >
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:22:02AM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 09:58:00AM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Sure. Which branch shall I take it against (before or after your amba
> > changes)?
>
> If it's before them, we can think about putting it in as a fix during
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 09:58:00AM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> Sure. Which branch shall I take it against (before or after your amba
> changes)?
If it's before them, we can think about putting it in as a fix during
this -rc independently of the rest of the changes. If it's after,
then it'll proba
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 09:45:31PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 05:26:00PM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-realview/include/mach/irqs-pb1176.h
> > b/arch/arm/mach-realview/include/mach/irqs-pb1176.h
> > index 5c3c625..708f841 100644
> >
On 01/25/2012 02:12 PM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
> Jaehoon Chung wrote:
>> Hi Mr Jeon..
>>
>> Are Pre_req and post_req used with only the IDMAC..?
> Currently internal dma is considered.
> Do you use system dma operation?
I used the IDMAC.
My means...other dma system can also use this feature, righ
12 matches
Mail list logo
