[PATCH] regmap: Load register defaults in blocks rather than register by register

[PATCH] regmap: Load register defaults in blocks rather than register by register

[Mark Brown]

Currently we use the normal single register write function to load the
default values into the cache, resulting in a large number of reallocations
when there are blocks of registers as we extend the memory region we are
using to store the values. Instead scan through the list of defaults for
blocks of adjacent registers and do a single allocation and insert for each
such block. No functional change.

We do not take advantage of the maple tree preallocation, this is purely at
the regcache level. It is not clear to me yet if the maple tree level would
help much here or if we'd have more overhead from overallocating and then
freeing maple tree data.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c
index 9b1b559107ef..2d2d5d7ee447 100644
--- a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c
+++ b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c
@@ -239,11 +239,41 @@ static int regcache_maple_exit(struct regmap *map)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static int regcache_maple_insert_block(struct regmap *map, int first,
+					int last)
+{
+	struct maple_tree *mt = map->cache;
+	MA_STATE(mas, mt, first, last);
+	unsigned long *entry;
+	int i, ret;
+
+	entry = kcalloc(last - first + 1, sizeof(unsigned long), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!entry)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < last - first + 1; i++)
+		entry[i] = map->reg_defaults[first + i].def;
+
+	mas_lock(&mas);
+
+	mas_set_range(&mas, map->reg_defaults[first].reg,
+		      map->reg_defaults[last].reg);
+	ret = mas_store_gfp(&mas, entry, GFP_KERNEL);
+
+	mas_unlock(&mas);
+
+	if (ret)
+		kfree(entry);
+
+	return ret;
+}
+
 static int regcache_maple_init(struct regmap *map)
 {
 	struct maple_tree *mt;
 	int i;
 	int ret;
+	int range_start;
 
 	mt = kmalloc(sizeof(*mt), GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!mt)
@@ -252,14 +282,30 @@ static int regcache_maple_init(struct regmap *map)
 
 	mt_init(mt);
 
-	for (i = 0; i < map->num_reg_defaults; i++) {
-		ret = regcache_maple_write(map,
-					   map->reg_defaults[i].reg,
-					   map->reg_defaults[i].def);
-		if (ret)
-			goto err;
+	if (!map->num_reg_defaults)
+		return 0;
+
+	range_start = 0;
+
+	/* Scan for ranges of contiguous registers */
+	for (i = 1; i < map->num_reg_defaults; i++) {
+		if (map->reg_defaults[i].reg !=
+		    map->reg_defaults[i - 1].reg + 1) {
+			ret = regcache_maple_insert_block(map, range_start,
+							  i - 1);
+			if (ret != 0)
+				goto err;
+
+			range_start = i;
+		}
 	}
 
+	/* Add the last block */
+	ret = regcache_maple_insert_block(map, range_start,
+					  map->num_reg_defaults - 1);
+	if (ret != 0)
+		goto err;
+
 	return 0;
 
 err:

---
base-commit: 44c026a73be8038f03dbdeef028b642880cf1511
change-id: 20230523-regcache-maple-load-defaults-f752b78d08ea

Best regards,
-- 
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>

Re: [PATCH] regmap: Load register defaults in blocks rather than register by register

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, 23 May 2023 22:22:27 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> Currently we use the normal single register write function to load the
> default values into the cache, resulting in a large number of reallocations
> when there are blocks of registers as we extend the memory region we are
> using to store the values. Instead scan through the list of defaults for
> blocks of adjacent registers and do a single allocation and insert for each
> such block. No functional change.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regmap.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] regmap: Load register defaults in blocks rather than register by register
      commit: 3a48d2127f4dbd767d43bf8280b67d585e701f75

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark