Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 6 Feb 2005 04:04:52 +0100 | From | Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2] ide: merge do_rw_taskfile() and flagged_taskfile() into do_taskfile() |
| |
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 11:13:31 +0900, Tejun Heo <tj@home-tj.org> wrote: > Hello, Bartlomiej.
Hi,
> This is a new version of ide_do_taskfile.patch. Compared to the > original do_rw_task(), only one more 'if' is used in the hot path, so > I think the performance issue can be ignored now. Also, there's no > userland visible change with this patch. Everything should work just > as it did with do_rw_taskfile()/flagged_taskfile(). > > do_taskfile() is different from do_rw_taskfile() in that
Is there any gain in changing name to do_taskfile()?
> - It uses task->data_phase to determine whether it's a DMA command > or not.
this is user-space visible change (it is right thing to do, I just wanted to point the fact)
> do_taskfile() is different from flagged_taskfile() in that > > - No (TASKFILE_MULTI_IN && !mult_count) check. ide_taskfile_ioctl() > checks the same thing, so it doesn't change anything.
The check may be needed. AFAIR drive->mult_count may change before our taskfile request is started.
> - No task->tf_out_flags handling. ide_end_drive_cmd() ignores it > anyway, so, again, it doesn't change anything.
I guess you mean ->tf_in_flags?
> So, what do you think?
This patch looks much better but could you move writing taskfile registers to separate helpers (one for non-flagged and one for flagged)?
Probably splitting non-flagged taskfile load helper off do_rw_taskfile() should be done in separate patch. We can then use this helper in ide-disk.c for __ide_do_rw_taskfile() (we can't do direct conversion to do_rw_taskfile() yet for various reasons).
Thanks, Bartlomiej - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |