From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751180AbeBBF73 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2018 00:59:29 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:35642 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750710AbeBBF7V (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2018 00:59:21 -0500 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org EB5396076A Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=cpandya@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: cache phandle nodes to decrease cost of of_find_node_by_phandle() To: Frank Rowand , Rob Herring Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1517429142-25727-1-git-send-email-frowand.list@gmail.com> <5b84a166-c71b-3a41-9e7f-a7624a8441f6@codeaurora.org> <38cdcae5-ec0f-d1be-b024-1990d4387731@gmail.com> <9e23d32f-05a0-ce8a-41f8-9a1a3d66be37@codeaurora.org> From: Chintan Pandya Message-ID: <567731e8-8f89-bd6e-c3d4-e36400e69198@codeaurora.org> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2018 11:29:16 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2/2/2018 12:40 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 02/01/18 02:31, Chintan Pandya wrote: >> >>>> Anyways, will fix this locally and share test results. >>> >>> Thanks, I look forward to the results. >>> >> >> Set up for this time was slightly different. So, taken all the numbers again. >> >> Boot to shell time (in ms): Experiment 2 >> [1] Base            : 14.843805 14.784842 14.842338 >> [2] 64 sized fixed cache    : 14.189292 14.200003 14.266711 >> [3] Dynamic freeable cache    : 14.112412 14.064772 14.036052 >> >> So, [3] (this patch) looks to be improving 750ms (on avg from base build). >> > > Is this with the many debug options enabled? If so, can you repeat with > a normal configuration? Could you share me the point of doing this experiment in perf mode ? I don't have a set up for taking these numbers in perf mode. For that, I need to ask some other team and round trip follow ups. In my set up, I rely on serial console logging which gets disabled in perf mode. > > Thanks, > > Frank > Chintan -- Qualcom India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project