MMC quirks relating to performance/lifetime.
From: Linus Walleij <hidden>
Date: 2011-02-09 08:37:40
Also in:
linux-mmc
[Quoting in verbatin so the orginal mail hits linux-mmc, this is very interesting!] 2011/2/8 Andrei Warkentin [off-list ref]:
Hi, I'm not sure if this is the best place to bring this up, but Russel's name is on a fair share of drivers/mmc code, and there does seem to be quite a bit of MMC-related discussions. Excuse me in advance if this isn't the right forum :-). Certain MMC vendors (maybe even quite a bit of them) use a pretty rigid buffering scheme when it comes to handling writes. There is usually a buffer A for random accesses, and a buffer B for sequential accesses. For certain Toshiba parts, it looks like buffer A is 8KB wide, with buffer B being 4MB wide, and all accesses larger than 8KB effectively equating to 4MB accesses. Worse, consecutive small (8k) writes are treated as one large sequential access, once again ending up in buffer B, thus necessitating out-of-order writing to work around this. What this means is decreased life span for the parts, and it also means a performance impact on small writes, but the first item is much more crucial, especially for smaller parts. As I've mentioned, probably more vendors are affected. How about a generic MMC_BLOCK quirk that splits the requests (and optionally reorders) them? The thresholds would then be adjustable as module/kernel parameters based on manfid. I'm asking because I have a patch now, but its ugly and hardcoded against a specific manufacturer.
There is a quirk API so that specific quirks can be flagged for certain vendors and cards, e.g. some Toshibas in this case. e.g. grep the kernel source for MMC_QUIRK_BLKSZ_FOR_BYTE_MODE. But as Russell says this probably needs to be signalled up to the block layer to be handled properly. Why don't you post the code you have today as an RFC: patch, I think many will be interested? Yours, Linus Walleij