Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mmc: block: replace __blk_end_request() with blk_end_request()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



2012/6/7, Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On 6/7/2012 4:05 PM, Namjae Jeon wrote:
>> This change is not meant for improving MMC throughput; it's basically
>> >  about becoming fair to other threads/interrupts in the system. By
>> > holding
>> >  spin lock and interrupts disabled for longer duration, we won't allow
>> >  other threads/interrupts to run at all.
> As i have mentioned in commit text,
>
> This change is not meant for improving MMC throughput; it's basically
> about becoming fair to other threads/interrupts in the system. By holding
> spin lock and interrupts disabled for longer duration, we won't allow
> other threads/interrupts to run at all.
Okay, this patch means latency will be improved on multi thread environment.
Looks reasonable to me.
Reviewed-by: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Regards,
> Subhash
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

Add to Google