Re: [PATCH 1/9] [I/OAT] DMA memcpy subsystem

[Kumar Gala]

On Mar 31, 2006, at 2:04 PM, Andrew Grover wrote:

> On 3/31/06, Ingo Oeser <netdev@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Kumar Gala wrote:
> > > Fair, but wouldn't it be better to have the association per client.
> > >
> > > Maybe leave the one as a summary and have a dir per client with
> > > similar stats that are for each client and add a per channel summary
> > > at the top level as well.
> > Such level of detail really belongs to debugging, IMHO.
> [snip]
>
> If we implemented more stats then yes debugfs sounds like it might be
> the way to go.
>
> > BTW: What is the actual frequency, at which such counters
> > will be incremented?
>
> Currently the code updates these variables (kept per cpu) every time a
> copy is queued. See include/linux/dmaengine.h.

Might it be better to update when the transfer is done incase of an  
error?

- kumar

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