[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m2ei1v76f1.fsf@bob.laptop.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 13:30:42 -0400
From: Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>
To: Manoj Iyer <manoj.iyer@...onical.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org,
matsumur@....ricoh.co.jp, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: Added quirks for Ricoh 1180:e823 lower base clock frequency
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 12 2011, Manoj Iyer wrote:
> btw only the 1st write was slower, subsequent writes looks ok.
> [..]
> I have attached the output of flashbench and the time test to
>
> http://launchpad.net/bugs/773524
> [..]
> == Finding the number of open erase blocks ==
> u@u:~/flash/flashbench$ sudo ./flashbench -O --erasesize=$[4 * 1024 *
> 1024] --blocksize=$[256 * 1024] /dev/mmcblk0 --open-au-nr=2
> 4MiB 6.36M/s
> 2MiB 6.24M/s
> 1MiB 6.17M/s
> 512KiB 6.19M/s
> 256KiB 6.22M/s
> u@u:~/flash/flashbench$
> [..]
> ====== AFTER PATCH ========
> [..]
> == Finding the number of open erase blocks ==
> u@u:~/flash/flashbench$ sudo ./flashbench -O --erasesize=$[4 * 1024 *
> 1024] --blocksize=$[256 * 1024] /dev/mmcblk0 --open-au-nr=2
> [sudo] password for u:
> 4MiB 5.49M/s
> 2MiB 6.22M/s
> 1MiB 6.22M/s
> 512KiB 6.21M/s
> 256KiB 6.21M/s
> u@u:~/flash/flashbench$
That's interesting. Arnd, any idea why only the first test of the
flashbench run would be slower after the patch?
Thanks,
- Chris.
--
Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org> <http://printf.net/>
One Laptop Per Child
--
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