From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476ACC433DB for ; Sat, 6 Feb 2021 00:38:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BEE265015 for ; Sat, 6 Feb 2021 00:38:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230094AbhBFAhv (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2021 19:37:51 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:59914 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231897AbhBEK5T (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2021 05:57:19 -0500 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 41BE168B05; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 11:56:35 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 11:56:34 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , "m.szyprowski@samsung.com" , "robin.murphy@arm.com" , "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linuxarm@openeuler.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dma-mapping: benchmark: pretend DMA is transmitting Message-ID: <20210205105634.GA7267@lst.de> References: <20210205020035.25340-1-song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com> <20210205092113.GA870@lst.de> <20210205103627.GB6694@lst.de> <0509bbb11bc547d1a8d9e85e05810b40@hisilicon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0509bbb11bc547d1a8d9e85e05810b40@hisilicon.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 10:52:37AM +0000, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote: > I assume there is no need to keep the same size with 5.11-rc, so > could change the struct to: > > struct map_benchmark { > __u64 avg_map_100ns; /* average map latency in 100ns */ > __u64 map_stddev; /* standard deviation of map latency */ > __u64 avg_unmap_100ns; /* as above */ > __u64 unmap_stddev; > __u32 threads; /* how many threads will do map/unmap in parallel */ > __u32 seconds; /* how long the test will last */ > __s32 node; /* which numa node this benchmark will run on */ > __u32 dma_bits; /* DMA addressing capability */ > __u32 dma_dir; /* DMA data direction */ > __u8 expansion[84]; /* For future use */ > }; > > This won't increase size on 64bit system, but it increases 4bytes > on 32bits system comparing to 5.11-rc. How do you think about it? Yes, that sounds good. Please send me a two patch series with the first one changing the alignment, and the second adding the delay. I'll send the first one off to Linus ASAP then.