Messages in this thread | | | From | Kumar Gala <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/9] [I/OAT] DMA memcpy subsystem | Date | Fri, 31 Mar 2006 14:06:29 -0600 |
| |
On Mar 31, 2006, at 2:04 PM, Andrew Grover wrote:
> On 3/31/06, Ingo Oeser <netdev@axxeo.de> 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |