Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 24/10/17 10:39, Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] > >>> However, you have completely ignored mine, Linus and Bartlomiej's >>> comments about that we want the blkmq port being a separate patch(es) >>> and then make the CMDQ patches on top. This worries me, because it >>> seems like our messages don't

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 24/10/17 08:37, Ulf Hansson wrote: > + Bartlomiej > > [...] > >> So my conclusion is, let's start a as you suggested, by not completing >> the request in ->done() as to maintain existing behavior. Then we can >> address optimizations on top, which very likely will involve doing

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

+ Bartlomiej [...] > So my conclusion is, let's start a as you suggested, by not completing > the request in ->done() as to maintain existing behavior. Then we can > address optimizations on top, which very likely will involve doing > changes to host drivers as well.

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 20/10/17 15:30, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 19/10/17 14:44, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 18/10/17 09:16, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>> On 11/10/17 16:58, Ulf Hansson wrote: On 11 October 2017 at 14:58, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 11/10/17 15:13, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 18/10/17 09:16, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 11/10/17 16:58, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 11 October 2017 at 14:58, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>> On 11/10/17 15:13, Ulf Hansson wrote: On 10 October 2017 at 15:31, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 11/10/17 16:58, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 11 October 2017 at 14:58, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 11/10/17 15:13, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On 10 October 2017 at 15:31, Adrian Hunter wrote: On 10/10/17 16:08, Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] >

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 11/10/17 16:58, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 11 October 2017 at 14:58, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 11/10/17 15:13, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On 10 October 2017 at 15:31, Adrian Hunter wrote: On 10/10/17 16:08, Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] >

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 12 October 2017 at 10:08, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > >> Actually completing the request in the ->done callback, may still be >> possible, because in principle it only needs to inform the other

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > Actually completing the request in the ->done callback, may still be > possible, because in principle it only needs to inform the other > prepared request that it may start, before it continues to post >

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 11 October 2017 at 14:58, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 11/10/17 15:13, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 10 October 2017 at 15:31, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>> On 10/10/17 16:08, Ulf Hansson wrote: [...] I have also run some test

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 11/10/17 15:13, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 10 October 2017 at 15:31, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 10/10/17 16:08, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> [...] >>> >>> >>> I have also run some test on my ux500 board and enabling the blkmq >>> path via the new MMC Kconfig option.

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 10 October 2017 at 15:31, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 10/10/17 16:08, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> [...] >> >> >> I have also run some test on my ux500 board and enabling the blkmq >> path via the new MMC Kconfig option. My idea was to run some iozone >>

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 10/10/17 16:08, Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] > > > I have also run some test on my ux500 board and enabling the blkmq > path via the new MMC Kconfig option. My idea was to run some iozone > comparisons between the legacy path and the new blkmq path, but I just > couldn't get

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

[...] I have also run some test on my ux500 board and enabling the blkmq path via the new MMC Kconfig option. My idea was to run some iozone comparisons between the legacy path and the new blkmq path, but I just couldn't get to that point because of the following errors.

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 10/10/17 15:12, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 21 September 2017 at 11:44, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 21/09/17 12:01, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On 13 September 2017 at 13:40, Adrian Hunter >>> wrote: Hi Here is V8 of the hardware command

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 21 September 2017 at 11:44, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 21/09/17 12:01, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 13 September 2017 at 13:40, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> Here is V8 of the hardware command queue patches without the software >>> command

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 02:40:00PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote: > Non-CQE blk-mq showed a 3% decrease in sequential read performance. This > seemed to be coming from the inferior latency of running work items compared > with a dedicated thread. Hacking blk-mq workqueue to be unbound reduced the >

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 21/09/17 12:01, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 13 September 2017 at 13:40, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> Hi >> >> Here is V8 of the hardware command queue patches without the software >> command queue patches, now using blk-mq and now with blk-mq support for >> non-CQE I/O. >> >>

Re: [PATCH V8 00/14] mmc: Add Command Queue support

On 13 September 2017 at 13:40, Adrian Hunter wrote: > Hi > > Here is V8 of the hardware command queue patches without the software > command queue patches, now using blk-mq and now with blk-mq support for > non-CQE I/O. > > After the unacceptable debacle of the last