[PATCH v2 01/12] mmc: add none blocking mmc request function
per.forlin at linaro.org
Tue Apr 26 10:22:12 EDT 2011
On 26 April 2011 15:29, David Vrabel <david.vrabel at csr.com> wrote:
> On 20/04/11 08:17, Per Forlin wrote:
>>> Using a MMC request queue has other benefits -- it allows multiple users
>>> without having to claim/release the host. This would be useful for
>>> (especially multi-function) SDIO.
>> You mean claim and release would be done only within the mmc core. The
>> timed saved here would equal the time it takes to release and claim
>> the host.
>> Claim and release can also be used for power management to indicate if
>> any client is using the host, if not the power can be switched off.
> Isn't there a separate runtime power management API that different from
I misunderstood. I thought you meant that the claim() and release()
were not needed if having an internal request queue in core.c.
Please discard my comment.
>> I just want to make sure I understand the multi-function SDIO case, I
>> haven't done any work with SDIO.
>> Can the SDIO functions compete over the same claim_host at the same time?
>> Example: if function 1 claims the host, function 2 and function 3 also
>> want to claim the host but have to wait for function 1 to release the
> This is the case. Each function driver has to claim exclusive access
> to the host.
>> What is the extra benefit of having the internal request queue for
>> multi function SDIO?
> It reduces the delays between commands if multiple drivers are sending
> commands. I estimated performance improvements with 2-3% from just
> removing the need to claim/release in one particular SDIO function
> driver. Performance improvements for multi-function cards would be a
> bit more (5% perhaps?).
Your estimates are promising.
> The more important benefit is the simplification of the API.
I agree. I will make a prototype for this. I don't think I will be
able to find time for this until middle of May. I let know you when I
More information about the linux-arm-kernel