Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] dma-buf: Performance improvements for system heap & a system-uncached implementation

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

 



Hi John,

On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 04:02:50AM +0000, John Stultz wrote:
> Hey All,

...

> 
> I did add to this series a reworked version of my uncached
> system heap implementation I was submitting a few weeks back.
> Since it duplicated a lot of the now reworked system heap code,
> I realized it would be much simpler to add the functionality to
> the system_heap implementaiton itself.

That looks like a neat approach to me. Referencing your previous
thread, I like the separate heap (as you have done), rather than a
generic "cached"/"noncached" flag on all heaps.

> 
> While not improving the core allocation performance, the
> uncached heap allocations do result in *much* improved
> performance on HiKey960 as it avoids a lot of flushing and
> invalidating buffers that the cpu doesn't touch often.
> 
> Feedback on these would be great!

Minor nit: s/detatch/detach/ on both heaps, but other than that
you can add my r-b to patches 1-5.

As you've said, it does feel like there's some room for
de-duplication, but that will be easier to work out once the
implementations settle.

I've a couple of comments for the uncached heap, but I'm not confident
I understand the implications of having the non-cached alias enough to
say if it looks OK or not.

Cheers!
-Brian



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Input]     [Video for Linux]     [Gstreamer Embedded]     [Mplayer Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]

  Powered by Linux