lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [Question] PM-QoS: PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY == interrupt latency?
From
Hi,

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 22:31:34 +0800
> Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Looks like it is a bit difficult to understand PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY
>> from the words' meaning.
>>
>> After searching from google, I don't find some useful information about
>> the root cause for introducing PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY. I understand
>> it is very similar to interrupt latency. Also from the comment for
>> omap_pm_set_max_mpu_wakeup_lat in file[1], the description is basically same
>> with interrupt latency.
>>
>> >From comments of pm_qos_add_request usages in drivers, it can be understood
>> as interrupt latency too, IMO.
>>
>> So, could we think that PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY is interrupt latency?
>
> No. Well it may be on some platforms but it isn't the same thing. On some
> devices a DMA transfer doesn't need the CPU involved but needs the CPU to
> respond within a set timescale (eg for coherency or bus arbitration). It

I understand only the CPU can respond after it is notified by a
interrupt event,
don't I?

Also could you give a example about how the CPU responds to a DMA transfer
within a set timescale if it is required?

> is not the same thing as IRQ latency.


thanks,
--
Ming Lei


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-11 03:31    [W:1.204 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site