This reverts commit 62649165cb02ab95b57360bb362886935f524f26.
The patch decreased the write performance quite a bit.
Here is an example on an i.MX 8M Quad platform.
- Before the revert:
Sending sparse 'vendor' 1/2 (516436 KB) OKAY [ 5.113s]
Writing 'vendor' OKAY [128.335s]
Sending sparse 'vendor' 2/2 (76100 KB) OKAY [ 0.802s]
Writing 'vendor' OKAY [ 27.902s]
- After the revert:
Sending sparse 'vendor' 1/2 (516436 KB) OKAY [ 5.310s]
Writing 'vendor' OKAY [ 18.041s]
Sending sparse 'vendor' 2/2 (76100 KB) OKAY [ 1.244s]
Writing 'vendor' OKAY [ 2.663s]
Considering that the patch only moves buffer around to avoid a warning
message about misaligned buffers, let's keep the best performances.
Signed-off-by: Gary Bisson <gary.bis...@boundarydevices.com>
Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.ki...@boundarydevices.com>
---
lib/image-sparse.c | 69 ++++++----------------------------------------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/image-sparse.c b/lib/image-sparse.c
index 5ec0f94ab3e..d80fdbbf58e 100644
--- a/lib/image-sparse.c
+++ b/lib/image-sparse.c
@@ -46,66 +46,9 @@
#include <asm/cache.h>
#include <linux/math64.h>
-#include <linux/err.h>
static void default_log(const char *ignored, char *response) {}
-static lbaint_t write_sparse_chunk_raw(struct sparse_storage *info,
- lbaint_t blk, lbaint_t blkcnt,
- void *data,
- char *response)
-{
- lbaint_t n = blkcnt, write_blks, blks = 0, aligned_buf_blks = 100;
- uint32_t *aligned_buf = NULL;
-
- if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(SYS_DCACHE_OFF)) {
- write_blks = info->write(info, blk, n, data);
- if (write_blks < n)
- goto write_fail;
-
- return write_blks;
- }
-
- aligned_buf = memalign(ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN, info->blksz *
aligned_buf_blks);
- if (!aligned_buf) {
- info->mssg("Malloc failed for: CHUNK_TYPE_RAW", response);
- return -ENOMEM;
- }
-
- while (blkcnt > 0) {
- n = min(aligned_buf_blks, blkcnt);
- memcpy(aligned_buf, data, n * info->blksz);
-
- /* write_blks might be > n due to NAND bad-blocks */
- write_blks = info->write(info, blk + blks, n, aligned_buf);
- if (write_blks < n) {
- free(aligned_buf);
- goto write_fail;
- }
-
- blks += write_blks;
- data += n * info->blksz;
- blkcnt -= n;
- }
-
- free(aligned_buf);
- return blks;
-
-write_fail:
- if (IS_ERR_VALUE(write_blks)) {
- printf("%s: Write failed, block #" LBAFU " [" LBAFU "]
(%lld)\n",
- __func__, blk + blks, n, (long long)write_blks);
- info->mssg("flash write failure", response);
- return write_blks;
- }
-
- /* write_blks < n */
- printf("%s: Write failed, block #" LBAFU " [" LBAFU "]\n",
- __func__, blk + blks, n);
- info->mssg("flash write failure(incomplete)", response);
- return -1;
-}
-
int write_sparse_image(struct sparse_storage *info,
const char *part_name, void *data, char *response)
{
@@ -209,11 +152,15 @@ int write_sparse_image(struct sparse_storage *info,
return -1;
}
- blks = write_sparse_chunk_raw(info, blk, blkcnt,
- data, response);
- if (blks < 0)
+ blks = info->write(info, blk, blkcnt, data);
+ /* blks might be > blkcnt (eg. NAND bad-blocks) */
+ if (blks < blkcnt) {
+ printf("%s: %s" LBAFU " [" LBAFU "]\n",
+ __func__, "Write failed, block #",
+ blk, blks);
+ info->mssg("flash write failure", response);
return -1;
-
+ }
blk += blks;
bytes_written += ((u64)blkcnt) * info->blksz;
total_blocks += chunk_header->chunk_sz;
--
2.35.1
