Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 2 authors, 2017-10-16
DORMANTno replies
Revisions (2)
  1. v2 [diff vs current]
  2. v2 current

[PATCH v2 0/4] SMMUv3 CMD_SYNC optimisation

From: Will Deacon <hidden>
Date: 2017-10-16 15:02:09
Also in: linux-iommu

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 08:05:21PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 02:44:24PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
quoted
Since Nate reported a reasonable performance boost from the out-of-line
MSI polling in v1 [1], I've now implemented the equivalent for cons
polling as well - that has been boot-tested on D05 with some trivial I/O
and at least doesn't seem to lock up or explode. There's also a little
cosmetic tweaking to make the patches a bit cleaner as a series.

Robin.

[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/iommu at lists.linux-foundation.org/msg19657.html

Robin Murphy (5):
  iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Specialise CMD_SYNC handling
  iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Forget about cmdq-sync interrupt
  iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Use CMD_SYNC completion interrupt
  iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Poll for CMD_SYNC outside cmdq lock
  iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Use burst-polling for sync completion
What's this final mythical patch about? I don't see it in the series.

Anyway, the first two patches look fine to me, but this doesn't apply
on top of my iommu/devel branch so they will need rebasing.
No idea what I was doing wrong on Friday, but the first two patches apply
cleanly now, so I'll push them out in a bit.

Sorry for the noise,

Will
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help