[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 22:14:39 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Chris Leech <christopher.leech@...el.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] ioatdma: Push pending transactions to hardware more
frequently
Chris Leech wrote:
> Every 20 descriptors turns out to be to few append commands with
> newer/faster CPUs. Pushing every 4 still cuts down on MMIO writes to an
> acceptable level without letting the DMA engine run out of work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Leech <christopher.leech@...el.com>
> ---
>
> drivers/dma/ioatdma.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/ioatdma.c b/drivers/dma/ioatdma.c
> index 8e87261..0f77a9d 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/ioatdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/ioatdma.c
> @@ -310,7 +310,7 @@ static dma_cookie_t do_ioat_dma_memcpy(struct ioat_dma_chan *ioat_chan,
> list_splice_init(&new_chain, ioat_chan->used_desc.prev);
>
> ioat_chan->pending += desc_count;
> - if (ioat_chan->pending >= 20) {
> + if (ioat_chan->pending >= 4) {
This sounds like something that will always be wrong -- or in other
words, always be right for only the latest CPUs. Can this be made
dynamic, based on some timing factor?
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists