[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4633283C.2000301@drzeus.cx>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 12:55:56 +0200
From: Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@...eus.cx>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...il.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> I have a hard time believe that device hardware limits don't allow them
> to have enough space to handle larger requests. If so it was a poor
> design by the hardware manufacturers.
>
In the MMC layer, the block size is a major bottle neck. None of the currently
supported hardware supports scatter/gather so we're restricted to servicing a
single continuous chunk of memory at a time. And since latency is substantial
for MMC/SD, good performance is several orders above 4k. We get ~8 MB/s for
cards which are supposed to do 20 MB/s (which has been tested against other
systems where we can get larger memory chunks), and the peasants are getting a
bit unruly.
I plan to experiment with some bounce buffer scheme to get performance up, but
getting large blocks directly would make such hacks unnecessary.
Just my two cents.
Rgds
--
-- Pierre Ossman
Linux kernel, MMC maintainer http://www.kernel.org
PulseAudio, core developer http://pulseaudio.org
rdesktop, core developer http://www.rdesktop.org
-
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