[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130107181500.24c56803@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 18:15:00 -0200
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...dd.com>, federico.vaga@...il.com,
m.szyprowski@...sung.com, mchehab@...radead.org, pawel@...iak.com,
hans.verkuil@...co.com, giancarlo.asnaghi@...com,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
s.nawrocki@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] videobuf2-dma-streaming: new videobuf2 memory
allocator
Em Mon, 7 Jan 2013 12:40:50 -0700
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> escreveu:
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2013 00:09:47 +0100
> Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...dd.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't expect you'll see serious performance differences on the PC. I
> > think ARM users will have better benefits, due to the different cache
> > architecture. You told me Jon measured meaningful figures on a Marvel
> > CPU.
>
> It made the difference between 10 frames per second with the CPU running
> flat out and 30fps mostly idle. I think that probably counts as
> meaningful, yeah...:)
Couldn't this performance difference be due to the usage of GFP_DMA inside
the VB2 code, like Federico's new patch series is proposing?
If not, why are there a so large performance penalty?
Regards,
Mauro
--
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