Hello Chanho Min,

On 2012-08-02 오전 11:50, Chanho Min wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Kyungsik Lee [mailto:kyungsik....@lge.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 10:06 AM
To: Chris Ball
Cc: Venkatraman S; Jaehoon Chung; raphael.andy....@gmail.com; linux-
m...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Kyungsik Lee
Subject: [PATCH RESEND v4] mmc: core: Remove bounce buffer in
mmc_send_cxd_data()

It is expected that Extended CSD register(the size of this register
is larger than CID/CSD) will be referenced more frequently as more
fields have been added to Extended CSD and it seems that it is not
a good option to double the memory used.

This patch is intended to avoid the use of bounce buffer for reading
Extended CSD register in mmc_send_cxd_data().

Signed-off-by: Kyungsik Lee <kyungsik....@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: S, Venkatraman <svenk...@ti.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- Handling on-stack buffer if it's used in caller.

Changes in v3:
- Remove unnecesary code.

Changes in v4:
- Modify codes based-on S, Venkatraman's comments.
---
drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c |   54
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
-
1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c
index 0ed2cc5..920a017 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c
@@ -239,13 +239,19 @@ mmc_send_cxd_data(struct mmc_card *card, struct
mmc_host
*host,
        struct mmc_data data = {0};
        struct scatterlist sg;
        void *data_buf;
+       int is_on_stack;

-       /* dma onto stack is unsafe/nonportable, but callers to this
-        * routine normally provide temporary on-stack buffers ...
-        */
-       data_buf = kmalloc(len, GFP_KERNEL);
-       if (data_buf == NULL)
-               return -ENOMEM;
+       is_on_stack = object_is_on_stack(buf);
+       if (is_on_stack) {
+
+               /* dma onto stack is unsafe/nonportable, but callers to this
+                * routine normally provide temporary on-stack buffers ...
+                */
+               data_buf = kmalloc(len, GFP_KERNEL);
+               if (data_buf == NULL)
+                       return -ENOMEM;
+       } else
+               data_buf = buf;

        mrq.cmd = &cmd;
        mrq.data = &data;
@@ -280,8 +286,10 @@ mmc_send_cxd_data(struct mmc_card *card, struct
mmc_host
*host,

        mmc_wait_for_req(host, &mrq);

-       memcpy(buf, data_buf, len);
-       kfree(data_buf);
+       if (is_on_stack) {
+               memcpy(buf, data_buf, len);
+               kfree(data_buf);
+       }

        if (cmd.error)
                return cmd.error;
@@ -294,24 +302,32 @@ mmc_send_cxd_data(struct mmc_card *card, struct
mmc_host
*host,
int mmc_send_csd(struct mmc_card *card, u32 *csd)
{
        int ret, i;
+       u32 *csd_tmp;

        if (!mmc_host_is_spi(card->host))
                return mmc_send_cxd_native(card->host, card->rca << 16,
                                csd, MMC_SEND_CSD);

-       ret = mmc_send_cxd_data(card, card->host, MMC_SEND_CSD, csd, 16);
+       csd_tmp = kmalloc(16, GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!csd_tmp)
+               return -ENOMEM;
+
+       ret = mmc_send_cxd_data(card, card->host, MMC_SEND_CSD, csd_tmp,
16);
        if (ret)
-               return ret;
+               goto err;

        for (i = 0;i < 4;i++)
-               csd[i] = be32_to_cpu(csd[i]);
+               csd[i] = be32_to_cpu(csd_tmp[i]);

-       return 0;
+err:
+       kfree(csd_tmp);
+       return ret;
}
If we can handle for the on-stack buffer in mmc_send_cxd_data, why do we
need callers's modification as bellows?
As you comment above, on-stack buffer can be handled with no better performance gain. In case of both mmc_send_cid() and mmc_send_csd(), on-stack buffers have not been allocated in the upper callers to the two functions(you may check it in the upper callers). And you will find out the reason why such a modification below is needed in the mail thread
(Reply to S, Venkatraman's comment).

Thanks
Kyungsik Lee
int mmc_send_cid(struct mmc_host *host, u32 *cid)
{
        int ret, i;
+       u32 *cid_tmp;

        if (!mmc_host_is_spi(host)) {
                if (!host->card)
@@ -320,14 +336,20 @@ int mmc_send_cid(struct mmc_host *host, u32 *cid)
                                cid, MMC_SEND_CID);
        }

-       ret = mmc_send_cxd_data(NULL, host, MMC_SEND_CID, cid, 16);
+       cid_tmp = kmalloc(16, GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!cid_tmp)
+               return -ENOMEM;
+
+       ret = mmc_send_cxd_data(NULL, host, MMC_SEND_CID, cid_tmp, 16);
        if (ret)
-               return ret;
+               goto err;

        for (i = 0;i < 4;i++)
-               cid[i] = be32_to_cpu(cid[i]);
+               cid[i] = be32_to_cpu(cid_tmp[i]);

-       return 0;
+err:
+       kfree(cid_tmp);
+       return ret;
}

int mmc_send_ext_csd(struct mmc_card *card, u8 *ext_csd)
--
1.7.0.4
Thanks
Chanho Min



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to