[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F6B25A4.4090006@mvista.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 17:14:12 +0400
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...sta.com>
To: Rafal Prylowski <prylowski@...asoft.pl>
CC: Ryan Mallon <rmallon@...il.com>,
"vinod.koul@...el.com" <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@....fi>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@...ionengravers.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ep93xx: Implement double buffering for M2M DMA channels
Hello.
On 22-03-2012 14:00, Rafal Prylowski wrote:
>> I haven't looked through the patch yet, since I'm waiting on more
>> information from Mika and Hartley's testing.
>> However, the commit log doesn't tell me why we want this change. Is it a
>> performance improvement? If so, do you have some numbers that we can
>> paste into the commit log?
> In principle, using double buffering should be faster than using only
> one buffer and disabling/enabling channel each time. But my measurements
> doesn't show any significant change.
> The real reason for this change is that current code is not 100% reliable
> in IDE-DMA (I'm planning to submit ep93xx ide driver to linux-ide soon).
IDE or libata driver? Asking because IDE drivers are not accepted anymore.
WBR, Sergei
--
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