On Wednesday, August 27, 2008 5:22 pm Nick Piggin wrote: > > However, when other DRM drivers get around to doing memory management, > > I'm sure they'll also be interested in an ioremap_wc that doesn't eat > > ipi costs. For us, the ipis for flushing were eating over 10% of CPU > > time. If your patch series cuts that cost, we could drop this piece at > > that point. > > It can cut the cost quite significantly on normal vmap/vunmap loads I > tested. Whether it will work as well on your workload, I don't know > but I would have liked to find out. I raised this issue quite a while > back, so I'm disappointed it had not been tried... I think Eric has code with the vmap changes now? Given our discussions at KS/Plumbers would you be ok with acking these patches? Or do you want a repost so you can check out the vmap stuff? After talking a bit more about it, I think we agreed that the ioctl interface is actually a better approach then trying to shoehorn this stuff into system calls, so aside from the vmap code (which could be done in 2.6.29 or whenever the vmap stuff lands) I think this patchset is pretty close to what we want in drm-next now... Thanks, Jesse -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
