Re: [PATCH V1] mmc: core: Add partial initialization support

From: Sarthak Garg <quic_sartgarg@quicinc.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: "Kamasali Satyanarayan (Consultant) (QUIC)" 
	<quic_kamasali@quicinc.com>,
	"avri.altman@wdc.com" <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	"linus.walleij@linaro.org" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	"shawn.lin@rock-chips.com" <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>,
	"merez@codeaurora.org" <merez@codeaurora.org>,
	"s.shtylyov@omp.ru" <s.shtylyov@omp.ru>,
	"huijin.park@samsung.com" <huijin.park@samsung.com>,
	"briannorris@chromium.org" <briannorris@chromium.org>,
	"digetx@gmail.com" <digetx@gmail.com>,
	"linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Veerabhadrarao Badiganti" <vbadigan@codeaurora.org>,
	Shaik Sajida Bhanu <sbhanu@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] mmc: core: Add partial initialization support
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 12:09:18 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c06480b1-95e3-49cd-9498-5c7c5f1deabe@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPDyKFq2-Jwii_aMbsqYNM_Dq0-MMEEtUYnNKGbQgvDL+M-wdw@mail.gmail.com>

On 6/16/2022 4:18 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2022 at 07:37, Sarthak Garg (QUIC)
> <quic_sartgarg@quicinc.com> wrote:
>> Hi Ulf,
>>
>> Please find the gains seen on micron and kingston eMMC parts below with partial initialization feature (These are the averaged numbers) :
>>
>> 1) Micron eMMC (ManfID 0x13)
>>
>> Partial init                            Full Init
>>
>> a) _mmc_resume:                         _mmc_resume :
>>
>> Total time : 62ms                       Total time : 84ms
>> (Decrease % from full init = ~26%)
> Alright, so we gained around 22ms. Not too bad.
>
>> Breakup :
>> mmc_claim_host_time: 0.2ms              mmc_claim_host_time: 0.1ms
>> mmc_power_up_time: 33ms         mmc_power_up_time: 33ms
>> mmc_sleepawake_time: 28ms               mmc_init_card_time: 50ms
>> mmc_partial_init_time: 1ms
>>
>> b) _mmc_suspend:                        _mmc_suspend:
>>
>> Total time: 5ms                         Total time: 7.5ms
>> mmc_claim_host_time: 0.5ms              mmc_claim_host_time: 1ms
>> mmc_flush_cache_time : 1.5 ms   mmc_flush_cache_time : 2.5 ms
>> mmc_sleep_time: 1.5ms           mmc_sleep_time: 2ms
>> mmc_power_off_time: 1.5ms               mmc_power_off_time: 1.5ms
> The suspend time shouldn't really differ. Or is there a reason for this?

I think this could be due to run to run variation as we can see 
mmc_claim_host and mmc_flush_cache itself taking some extra 1ms.

>
>>
>> 2) Kingston eMMC (ManfID 0x70)
>>
>> Partial init                            Full Init
>>
>> a) _mmc_resume:                 _mmc_resume :
>> Total time : 46ms                       Total time : 62ms
>> (Decrease % from full init = ~25%)
>>
>> Breakup :
>> mmc_claim_host_time: 0.2ms              mmc_claim_host_time: 0.2ms
>> mmc_power_up_time: 30ms         mmc_power_up_time: 30ms
>> mmc_sleepawake_time: 14ms               mmc_init_card_time: 31ms
>> mmc_partial_init_time: 2ms
>>
>>
>> b) _mmc_suspend:                        _mmc_suspend:
>> Total time : 5ms                        Total: 5ms
>>
>> Breakup :
>> mmc_claim_host_time: 0.5ms              mmc_claim_host_time: 0.5ms
>> mmc_flush_cache_time : 1.5 ms   mmc_flush_cache_time : 1.5 ms
>> mmc_sleep_time: 1.5ms           mmc_sleep_time: 1ms
>> mmc_power_off_time: 1.5ms               mmc_power_off_time: 1.5ms
>>
>> Did some minor modifications as well to this patchset as per avri's comment which I'll post as V2.
>> Please let me know your inputs about these numbers.
> Thanks for posting these numbers, much appreciated! Please try to
> include some of the data as part of the commit message as I think it's
> valuable information.
>
> When it comes to reviewing the code, I am awaiting your v2 then.
>
> [...]
>
> Kind regards
> Uffe

Sure will add this data to the commit text in V2.