On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 21:43:28 +0200 Per Forlin wrote:
> Documentation about the background and the design of mmc non-blocking.
> Host driver guidelines to minimize request preparation overhead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Per Forlin <per.forlin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
It would be better to omit the introductory email and put all of its comments
in this one [PATCH] email.
> Documentation/mmc/00-INDEX | 2 +
> Documentation/mmc/mmc-async-req.txt | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/mmc/mmc-async-req.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/mmc/00-INDEX b/Documentation/mmc/00-INDEX
> index 93dd7a7..11bc2cf 100644
> --- a/Documentation/mmc/00-INDEX
> +++ b/Documentation/mmc/00-INDEX
> @@ -4,3 +4,5 @@ mmc-dev-attrs.txt
> - info on SD and MMC device attributes
> mmc-dev-parts.txt
> - info on SD and MMC device partitions
> +mmc-async-req.txt
> + - info on mmc asynchronous request
requests
> diff --git a/Documentation/mmc/mmc-async-req.txt b/Documentation/mmc/mmc-async-req.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..d7e7698
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/mmc/mmc-async-req.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
> +Rationale
> +=========
> +
> +How significant is the cache maintenance overhead?
> +It depends, fast eMMC and multiple cache levels with speculative cache
It depends:
or
It depends. Fast
> +pre-fetch makes the cache overhead relatively significant. If the DMA
> +preparations for the next request are done in parallel to the current
with the current
> +transfer the DMA preparation overhead would not affect the MMC performance.
transfer,
> +The intention of non-blocking (asynchronous) mmc requests is to minimize the
> +time between when an mmc request ends and another mmc request begins.
> +Using mmc_wait_for_req() the MMC controller is idle while dma_map_sg and
mmc_wait_for_req(),
> +dma_unmap_sg is processing. Using non-blocking mmc requests makes it
are processing.
> +possible to prepare the caches for next job in parallel to an active
with an active
> +mmc request.
> +
> +MMC block driver
> +================
> +
> +The issue_rw_rq() in the mmc block driver is made non-blocking.
preferably: MMC
throughout the file (when not a function or data name, etc.)
> +The increase in throughput is proportional to the time it takes to
> +prepare (major part of preparations is dma_map_sg and dma_unmap_sg)
are
> +a request and how fast the memory is. The faster the MMC/SD is
> +the more significant the prepare request time becomes. Roughly the expected
> +performance gain is 5% for large writes and 10% on large reads on a L2 cache
> +platform. In power save mode, when clocks run on a lower frequency, the DMA
> +preparation may cost even more. As long as these slower preparations are run
> +in parallel to the transfer performance wont be affected.
with won't
> +
> +Details on measurements from IOZone and mmc_test
> +================================================
> +
> +https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/Kernel/Specs/StoragePerfMMC-async-req
> +
> +MMC core API extension
> +======================
> +
> +There is one new public function mmc_start_req()
mmc_start_req().
> +It starts a new MMC command request for a host. The function isn't
> +truly non-blocking. If there is on ongoing async request it waits
> +for completion of that request and starts the new one and returns. It
> +doesn't wait for the new request to complete. If there is no ongoing
> +request it starts the new request and returns immediately.
> +
> +MMC host extensions
> +===================
> +
> +There are two optional hooks pre_req() and post_req() that the host driver
hooks -- pre_req() and post_req() -- that
> +may implement in order to move work to before and after the actual
> +mmc_request function is called. In the DMA case pre_req() may do
> +dma_map_sg() and prepare the dma descriptor, and post_req runs
DMA
> +the dma_unmap_sg.
> +
> +Optimize for the first request
> +==============================
> +
> +The first request in a series of requests can't be prepared in parallel to
with
> +the previous transfer, since there is no previous request.
> +The argument is_first_req in pre_req() indicates that there is no previous
> +request. The host driver may optimize for this scenario to minimize
> +the performance loss. A way to optimize for this is to split the current
> +request in two chunks, prepare the first chunk and start the request,
> +and finally prepare the second chunk and start the transfer.
> +
> +Pseudocode to handle is_first_req scenario with minimal prepare overhead:
> +if (is_first_req && req->size > threshold)
> + /* start MMC transfer for the complete transfer size */
> + mmc_start_command(MMC_CMD_TRANSFER_FULL_SIZE)
Please use ';' at the end of each pseudo-call.
> +
> + /*
> + * Begin to prepare DMA while cmd is being processed by MMC.
> + * The first chunk of the request should take the same time
> + * to prepare as the "MMC process command time".
> + * If prepare time exceeds MMC cmd time
> + * the transfer is delayed, guesstimate max 4k as first chunk size.
> + */
> + prepare_1st_chunk_for_dma(req)
> + /* flush pending desc to the DMAC (dmaengine.h) */
> + dma_issue_pending(req->dma_desc)
> +
> + prepare_2nd_chunk_for_dma(req)
> + /*
> + * The second issue_pending should be called before MMC runs out
> + * of the first chunk. If the MMC runs out of the first data chunk
> + * before this call, the transfer is delayed.
> + */
> + dma_issue_pending(req->dma_desc)
> --
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
