lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m2zkkbb9vn.fsf@bob.laptop.org>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:40:28 -0400
From:	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>
To:	Manoj Iyer <manoj.iyer@...onical.com>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, matsumur@....ricoh.co.jp,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: Added quirks for Ricoh 1180:e823 lower base clock frequency

Hi Manoj,

On Mon, Jul 18 2011, Manoj Iyer wrote:
> Here are the results with SanDisk SDSDXP1-016G-A75 16GB Extreme Pro
> SDHC Memory Card.
>
> u@u:~/flashbench$ sudo ./flashbench -a /dev/mmcblk0p1
> [sudo] password for u:
> align 4294967296        pre 1.16ms      on 1.15ms       post 1.15ms
> diff -2024ns
> align 2147483648        pre 1.2ms       on 1.2ms        post 1.2ms
> diff 522ns
> align 1073741824        pre 1.21ms      on 1.2ms        post 1.2ms
> diff 570ns
> align 536870912 pre 1.2ms       on 1.2ms        post 1.2ms      diff 662ns
> align 268435456 pre 1.2ms       on 1.2ms        post 1.2ms      diff 404ns
> align 134217728 pre 1.2ms       on 1.2ms        post 1.2ms      diff
> -1692ns
> align 67108864  pre 1.15ms      on 1.16ms       post 1.16ms     diff
> 1.37µs
> align 33554432  pre 1.18ms      on 1.19ms       post 1.15ms     diff
> 31.3µs
> align 16777216  pre 1.17ms      on 1.19ms       post 1.15ms     diff
> 31.5µs
> align 8388608   pre 1.17ms      on 1.21ms       post 1.18ms     diff
> 32.9µs
> align 4194304   pre 1.37ms      on 1.55ms       post 1.17ms     diff 274µs
> align 2097152   pre 1.37ms      on 1.37ms       post 1.39ms     diff
> -7992ns
> align 1048576   pre 1.33ms      on 1.33ms       post 1.34ms     diff
> -7793ns
> align 524288    pre 1.33ms      on 1.33ms       post 1.34ms     diff
> -6641ns
> align 262144    pre 1.34ms      on 1.38ms       post 1.35ms     diff
> 33.8µs
> align 131072    pre 1.35ms      on 1.37ms       post 1.34ms     diff
> 27.2µs
> align 65536     pre 1.34ms      on 1.37ms       post 1.34ms     diff
> 31.7µs
> align 32768     pre 1.33ms      on 1.37ms       post 1.34ms     diff
> 32.5µs
>
> u@u:~/flashbench$ sudo ./flashbench -O --erasesize=$[4 * 1024 * 1024]
> --blocksize=$[256 * 1024] /dev/mmcblk0p1 --open-au-nr=2
> 4MiB    23.2M/s
> 2MiB    23.6M/s
> 1MiB    23.5M/s
> 512KiB  23.2M/s
> 256KiB  23.2M/s
> u@u:~/flashbench$

I don't understand whether these measurements are before or after your
patch -- we're looking to see what the *difference* in performance is
with the patch applied, right?

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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ