From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752747AbdDIWnA (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Apr 2017 18:43:00 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:53141 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752602AbdDIWm7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Apr 2017 18:42:59 -0400 Message-ID: <1491774092.4166.195.camel@kernel.crashing.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 19/23] drivers/fsi: Add GPIO based FSI master From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Christopher Bostic , Joel Stanley Cc: Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Russell King , rostedt@goodmis.org, mingo@redhat.com, Greg KH , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Jeffery , Alistair Popple , "Edward A . James" , Jeremy Kerr Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 07:41:32 +1000 In-Reply-To: <5344146a-f450-7959-4688-a83ee022574b@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20170329174340.89109-1-cbostic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170329174340.89109-20-cbostic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <0e1bcf3a-e8d7-9f50-bdf7-2a1e7466665b@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1490907014.3177.207.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <93b21624-11fc-b71b-aa78-6cb4371c87ae@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1491344360.4166.68.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <5344146a-f450-7959-4688-a83ee022574b@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6 (3.22.6-1.fc25) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2017-04-09 at 16:22 -0500, Christopher Bostic wrote: > A 3 microsecond delay is required, however, to prevent occasional issues  > during heavy FSI bus load stress testing. > A 1 nanosecond delay using ndelay(1) had been specified prior to this  > but after looking more closely at real time performance it turned out to  > actually be roughly 1-2 microseconds.   This appears to be the minimum  > resolution using the delay() linux libraries on the AST2400/2500.    > Given this, increasing delay to 3 microseconds doesn't impact  > performance much considering I can now remove the sample input delay  > based on your recommendations to re-order the two clock delays. This is huge delays. We should consider a AST2xxx specific variant of the backend that uses nops or similar lab-calibrated constructs instead. Otherwise we are stuck in the kHz range, this is a >200Mhz bus :) I don't understand why 3us delay would thus be necessary. Where about did you observe issues ? Could it be that you don't wait long enough in the transitions from write to read ? Cheers, Ben.