Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAJs94EahjbkJRWKR=2QeD=tOMR=kznwXbQgTbKvSuTg4jBk1ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1807241652550.1311-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org> <CAJs94EZpJgDg0j8sVgOd56OY53mv7VxSODbhtR5MsZnFUoJA+g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJs94EZpJgDg0j8sVgOd56OY53mv7VxSODbhtR5MsZnFUoJA+g@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>
Date:   Mon, 30 Jul 2018 13:14:32 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAFQd5AKJrCAAFiis-YjKFULPb1zqboPVSgT8Uepg-C561fgeg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] media: usb: pwc: Don't use coherent DMA buffers for
 ISO transfer
To:     "Matwey V. Kornilov" <matwey@sai.msu.ru>
Cc:     Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@collabora.com>, hdegoede@redhat.com,
        Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xs4all.nl>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        Mike Isely <isely@pobox.com>,
        Bhumika Goyal <bhumirks@gmail.com>,
        Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com>,
        keiichiw@chromium.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:47 PM Matwey V. Kornilov <matwey@sai.msu.ru> wrote:
>
> 2018-07-24 23:55 GMT+03:00 Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>:
> > On Tue, 24 Jul 2018, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
> >
> >> 2018-07-23 21:57 GMT+03:00 Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>:
> >> > On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I've tried to strategies:
> >> >>
> >> >> 1) Use dma_unmap and dma_map inside the handler (I suppose this is
> >> >> similar to how USB core does when there is no URB_NO_TRANSFER_DMA_MAP)
> >> >
> >> > Yes.
> >> >
> >> >> 2) Use sync_cpu and sync_device inside the handler (and dma_map only
> >> >> once at memory allocation)
> >> >>
> >> >> It is interesting that dma_unmap/dma_map pair leads to the lower
> >> >> overhead (+1us) than sync_cpu/sync_device (+2us) at x86_64 platform.
> >> >> At armv7l platform using dma_unmap/dma_map  leads to ~50 usec in the
> >> >> handler, and sync_cpu/sync_device - ~65 usec.
> >> >>
> >> >> However, I am not sure is it mandatory to call
> >> >> dma_sync_single_for_device for FROM_DEVICE direction?
> >> >
> >> > According to Documentation/DMA-API-HOWTO.txt, the CPU should not write
> >> > to a DMA_FROM_DEVICE-mapped area, so dma_sync_single_for_device() is
> >> > not needed.
> >>
> >> Well, I measured the following at armv7l. The handler execution time
> >> (URB_NO_TRANSFER_DMA_MAP is used for all cases):
> >>
> >> 1) coherent DMA: ~3000 usec (pwc is not functional)
> >> 2) explicit dma_unmap and dma_map in the handler: ~52 usec
> >> 3) explicit dma_sync_single_for_cpu (no dma_sync_single_for_device): ~56 usec

That's very strange because on ARM dma_unmap_single() does exactly the
same thing as dma_sync_single_for_cpu():

arm_dma_map_page()
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.18-rc7/source/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c#L129
arm_dma_unmap_page()
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.18-rc7/source/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c#L159

arm_dma_sync_single_for_cpu()
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.18-rc7/source/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c#L167

Could you post the code you used for testing of cases 2) and 3)?

Best regards,
Tomasz