[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220126231239.1443128-2-tobias@waldekranz.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 00:12:38 +0100
From: Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
To: davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Improve performance of busy bit polling
Avoid a long delay when a busy bit is still set and has to be polled
again.
Measurements on a system with 2 Opals (6097F) and one Agate (6352)
show that even with this much tighter loop, we have about a 50% chance
of the bit being cleared on the first poll, all other accesses see the
bit being cleared on the second poll.
On a standard MDIO bus running MDC at 2.5MHz, a single access with 32
bits of preamble plus 32 bits of data takes 64*(1/2.5MHz) = 25.6us.
This means that mv88e6xxx_smi_direct_wait took 26us + CPU overhead in
the fast scenario, but 26us + 1500us + 26us + CPU overhead in the slow
case - bringing the average close to 1ms.
With this change in place, the slow case is closer to 2*26us + CPU
overhead, with the average well below 100us - a 10x improvement.
This translates to real-world winnings. On a 3-chip 20-port system,
the modprobe time drops by 88%:
Before:
root@...onet:~# time modprobe mv88e6xxx
real 0m 15.99s
user 0m 0.00s
sys 0m 1.52s
After:
root@...onet:~# time modprobe mv88e6xxx
real 0m 2.21s
user 0m 0.00s
sys 0m 1.54s
Signed-off-by: Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
---
drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c | 8 ++++----
drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/smi.c | 8 ++++----
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
index 58ca684d73f7..3566617143cf 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
@@ -86,12 +86,12 @@ int mv88e6xxx_write(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int addr, int reg, u16 val)
int mv88e6xxx_wait_mask(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int addr, int reg,
u16 mask, u16 val)
{
+ const unsigned long timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(50);
u16 data;
int err;
- int i;
/* There's no bus specific operation to wait for a mask */
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ do {
err = mv88e6xxx_read(chip, addr, reg, &data);
if (err)
return err;
@@ -99,8 +99,8 @@ int mv88e6xxx_wait_mask(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int addr, int reg,
if ((data & mask) == val)
return 0;
- usleep_range(1000, 2000);
- }
+ cpu_relax();
+ } while (time_before(jiffies, timeout));
dev_err(chip->dev, "Timeout while waiting for switch\n");
return -ETIMEDOUT;
diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/smi.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/smi.c
index 282fe08db050..a59f32243e08 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/smi.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/smi.c
@@ -55,11 +55,11 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_smi_direct_write(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip,
static int mv88e6xxx_smi_direct_wait(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip,
int dev, int reg, int bit, int val)
{
+ const unsigned long timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(50);
u16 data;
int err;
- int i;
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ do {
err = mv88e6xxx_smi_direct_read(chip, dev, reg, &data);
if (err)
return err;
@@ -67,8 +67,8 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_smi_direct_wait(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip,
if (!!(data & BIT(bit)) == !!val)
return 0;
- usleep_range(1000, 2000);
- }
+ cpu_relax();
+ } while (time_before(jiffies, timeout));
return -ETIMEDOUT;
}
--
2.25.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists