On 06/15/2017 01:17 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> - /* Do not use DMA if it's not available or for messages < 8 bytes */
>>> - if (IS_ERR(chan) || msg->len < 8)
>>> + if (IS_ERR(chan) || msg->len < RCAR_DMA_THRESHOLD || priv->flags & ID_P_NODMA)
>>
>> Might be more efficient to check for ID_P_NODMA first instead of msg->len.
>
> I think most of the I2C transfers are smaller (like reading/writing one
> register) than the threshold, so this "should" be more efficient. Plus,
> honestly, I also think this is a micro-optimization which is largely
> depending on the use-case. Can we agree on that?
Makes sense.
>
>>> - read = msg->flags & I2C_M_RD;
>>> + /* we need to check here because we need the 'current' context */
>>> + if (i2c_check_msg_for_dma(msg, RCAR_DMA_THRESHOLD, NULL) == -EFAULT) {
>>> + dev_dbg(dev, "skipping DMA for this whole transfer\n");
>>
>> Adding reason for skipping will be helpful.
>
> The I2C core helper will immediately print before that the buffer is not
> DMA capable. Do you think this together will do?
That is sufficient.
thanks,
-- Shuah
>
> Thanks for your input,
>
> Wolfram
>
