RE: [Patch v2] i2c: imx: add runtime pm support to improve the performance

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



From: Wolfram Sang <mailto:wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2015 6:41 AM
> To: Gao Pan-B54642
> Cc: linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Li Frank-B20596; Duan Fugang-B38611;
> u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] i2c: imx: add runtime pm support to improve the
> performance
> 
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 05:27:31PM +0800, Gao Pan wrote:
> > In our former i2c driver, i2c clk is enabled and disabled in xfer
> > function, which contributes to power saving. However, the clk enable
> > process brings a busy wait delay until the core is stable. As a
> > result, the performance is sacrificed.
> >
> > To weigh the power consumption and i2c bus performance, runtime pm is
> > the good solution for it. The clk is enabled when a i2c transfer
> > starts, and disabled after a specifically defined delay.
> >
> > Without the patch the test case (many eeprom reads) executes with
> approx:
> > real 1m7.735s
> > user 0m0.488s
> > sys 0m20.040s
> >
> > With the patch the same test case (many eeprom reads) executes with
> approx:
> > real 0m54.241s
> > user 0m0.440s
> > sys 0m5.920s
> >
> > From the test result, the patch get better performance.
> 
> Looks OK to me. coccicheck says something, though:
> 
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c:1098:7-26: pm_runtime_get_sync returns < 0
> as error. Unecessary IS_ERR_VALUE at line 1099
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c:896:10-29: pm_runtime_get_sync returns < 0
> as error. Unecessary IS_ERR_VALUE at line 897
> 
> Please fix that and add "kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" to CC when resending. I
> know they use the driver a lot.

Thanks, will fix it in next version.

> > V2:
> > As Uwe Kleine-König's suggestion, the version do below changes:
> > - call clk_prepare_enable in probe to avoid never enabling clock
> >   if CONFIG_PM is disabled
> > - enable clock before request IRQ in probe
> > - remove the pm staff in i2c_imx_isr
> 
> Thanks for this info. If you could put it below "---" that would be
> preferred by me.

Thanks.
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��-��)��jg��������ݢj����G�������j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥




[Index of Archives]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Linux Hardward Monitoring]     [LM Sensors]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux