From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com> To: broonie@kernel.org Cc: linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, eha@deif.com, angelo@sysam.it, andrew.smirnov@gmail.com, gustavo@embeddedor.com, weic@nvidia.com, mhosny@nvidia.com Subject: [PATCH 00/12] TCFQ to XSPI migration for NXP DSPI driver Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2020 00:00:32 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200304220044.11193-1-olteanv@gmail.com> (raw) From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com> This series aims to remove the most inefficient transfer method from the NXP DSPI driver. TCFQ (Transfer Complete Flag) mode works by transferring one word, waiting for its TX confirmation interrupt (or polling on the equivalent status bit), sending the next word, etc, until the buffer is complete. The issue with this mode is that it's fundamentally incompatible with any sort of batching such as writing to a FIFO. But actually, due to previous patchset ("Compatible string consolidation for NXP DSPI driver"): https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11414593/ all existing users of TCFQ mode today already support a more advanced feature set, in the form of XSPI (extended SPI). XSPI brings 2 extra features: - Word sizes up to 32 bits. This is sub-utilized today, and acceleration of smaller-than-32 bpw values is provided. - "Command cycling", basically the ability to write multiple words in a row and receiving an interrupt only after the completion of the last one. This is what enables us to make use of the full FIFO depth of this controller. Series was tested on the NXP LS1021A-TSN and LS1043A-RDB boards, both functionally as well as from a performance standpoint. The command used to benchmark the increased throughput was: spidev_test --device /dev/spidev1.0 --bpw 8 --size 256 --cpha --iter 10000000 --speed 20000000 where spidev1.0 is a dummy spidev node, using a chip select that no peripheral responds to. On LS1021A, which has a 4-entry-deep FIFO and a less powerful CPU, the performance increase brought by this patchset is from 2700 kbps to 5800 kbps. On LS1043A, which has a 16-entry-deep FIFO and a more powerful CPU, the performance increases from 4100 kbps to 13700 kbps. On average, SPI software timestamping is not adversely affected by the extra batching, due to the extra patches. There is one extra patch which clarifies why the TCFQ users were not converted to the "other" mode in this driver that makes use of the FIFO, which would be EOQ mode. My request to the many people on CC (known users and/or contributors) is to give this series a test to ensure there are no regressions, and for the Coldfire maintainers to clarify whether the EOQ limitation is acceptable for them in the long run. Vladimir Oltean (12): spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Simplify bytes_per_word gymnastics spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Remove unused chip->void_write_data spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Don't mask off undefined bits spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add comments around dspi_pop_tx and dspi_push_rx functions spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Rename fifo_{read,write} and {tx,cmd}_fifo_write spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Implement .max_message_size method for EOQ mode spi: Do spi_take_timestamp_pre for as many times as necessary spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Convert TCFQ users to XSPI FIFO mode spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Accelerate transfers using larger word size if possible spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Optimize dspi_setup_accel for lowest interrupt count spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Use EOQ for last word in buffer even for XSPI mode spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Take software timestamp in dspi_fifo_write drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c | 421 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- drivers/spi/spi.c | 19 +- include/linux/spi/spi.h | 3 +- 3 files changed, 288 insertions(+), 155 deletions(-) -- 2.17.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> To: broonie-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org Cc: linux-spi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, eha-/iRVSOupHO4@public.gmane.org, angelo-BIYBQhTR83Y@public.gmane.org, andrew.smirnov-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, gustavo-L1vi/lXTdts+Va1GwOuvDg@public.gmane.org, weic-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, mhosny-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org Subject: [PATCH 00/12] TCFQ to XSPI migration for NXP DSPI driver Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2020 00:00:32 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20200304220044.11193-1-olteanv@gmail.com> (raw) From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean-3arQi8VN3Tc@public.gmane.org> This series aims to remove the most inefficient transfer method from the NXP DSPI driver. TCFQ (Transfer Complete Flag) mode works by transferring one word, waiting for its TX confirmation interrupt (or polling on the equivalent status bit), sending the next word, etc, until the buffer is complete. The issue with this mode is that it's fundamentally incompatible with any sort of batching such as writing to a FIFO. But actually, due to previous patchset ("Compatible string consolidation for NXP DSPI driver"): https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11414593/ all existing users of TCFQ mode today already support a more advanced feature set, in the form of XSPI (extended SPI). XSPI brings 2 extra features: - Word sizes up to 32 bits. This is sub-utilized today, and acceleration of smaller-than-32 bpw values is provided. - "Command cycling", basically the ability to write multiple words in a row and receiving an interrupt only after the completion of the last one. This is what enables us to make use of the full FIFO depth of this controller. Series was tested on the NXP LS1021A-TSN and LS1043A-RDB boards, both functionally as well as from a performance standpoint. The command used to benchmark the increased throughput was: spidev_test --device /dev/spidev1.0 --bpw 8 --size 256 --cpha --iter 10000000 --speed 20000000 where spidev1.0 is a dummy spidev node, using a chip select that no peripheral responds to. On LS1021A, which has a 4-entry-deep FIFO and a less powerful CPU, the performance increase brought by this patchset is from 2700 kbps to 5800 kbps. On LS1043A, which has a 16-entry-deep FIFO and a more powerful CPU, the performance increases from 4100 kbps to 13700 kbps. On average, SPI software timestamping is not adversely affected by the extra batching, due to the extra patches. There is one extra patch which clarifies why the TCFQ users were not converted to the "other" mode in this driver that makes use of the FIFO, which would be EOQ mode. My request to the many people on CC (known users and/or contributors) is to give this series a test to ensure there are no regressions, and for the Coldfire maintainers to clarify whether the EOQ limitation is acceptable for them in the long run. Vladimir Oltean (12): spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Simplify bytes_per_word gymnastics spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Remove unused chip->void_write_data spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Don't mask off undefined bits spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add comments around dspi_pop_tx and dspi_push_rx functions spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Rename fifo_{read,write} and {tx,cmd}_fifo_write spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Implement .max_message_size method for EOQ mode spi: Do spi_take_timestamp_pre for as many times as necessary spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Convert TCFQ users to XSPI FIFO mode spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Accelerate transfers using larger word size if possible spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Optimize dspi_setup_accel for lowest interrupt count spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Use EOQ for last word in buffer even for XSPI mode spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Take software timestamp in dspi_fifo_write drivers/spi/spi-fsl-dspi.c | 421 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- drivers/spi/spi.c | 19 +- include/linux/spi/spi.h | 3 +- 3 files changed, 288 insertions(+), 155 deletions(-) -- 2.17.1
next reply other threads:[~2020-03-04 22:02 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-03-04 22:00 Vladimir Oltean [this message] 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 00/12] TCFQ to XSPI migration for NXP DSPI driver Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 01/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Simplify bytes_per_word gymnastics Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:38 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Simplify bytes_per_word gymnastics" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:38 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 02/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Remove unused chip->void_write_data Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Remove unused chip->void_write_data" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 03/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Don't mask off undefined bits Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Don't mask off undefined bits" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 04/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add comments around dspi_pop_tx and dspi_push_rx functions Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add comments around dspi_pop_tx and dspi_push_rx functions" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 05/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Rename fifo_{read,write} and {tx,cmd}_fifo_write Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Rename fifo_{read,write} and {tx,cmd}_fifo_write" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 06/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Implement .max_message_size method for EOQ mode Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Implement .max_message_size method for EOQ mode" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 07/12] spi: Do spi_take_timestamp_pre for as many times as necessary Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 12:12 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-05 12:12 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-05 13:00 ` Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 13:04 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-05 13:04 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-05 13:13 ` Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 13:13 ` Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 13:16 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-05 13:16 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: Do spi_take_timestamp_pre for as many times as necessary" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 08/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Convert TCFQ users to XSPI FIFO mode Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Convert TCFQ users to XSPI FIFO mode" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 09/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Accelerate transfers using larger word size if possible Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Accelerate transfers using larger word size if possible" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 10/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Optimize dspi_setup_accel for lowest interrupt count Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Optimize dspi_setup_accel for lowest interrupt count" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 11/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Use EOQ for last word in buffer even for XSPI mode Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-04 22:00 ` Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Use EOQ for last word in buffer even for XSPI mode" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown 2020-03-04 22:00 ` [PATCH 12/12] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Take software timestamp in dspi_fifo_write Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-04 22:00 ` Vladimir Oltean 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Applied "spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Take software timestamp in dspi_fifo_write" to the spi tree Mark Brown 2020-03-05 14:37 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20200304220044.11193-1-olteanv@gmail.com \ --to=olteanv@gmail.com \ --cc=andrew.smirnov@gmail.com \ --cc=angelo@sysam.it \ --cc=broonie@kernel.org \ --cc=eha@deif.com \ --cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=mhosny@nvidia.com \ --cc=weic@nvidia.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.