| Message ID | 20171004102924.12355-5-nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 06:29:23AM -0400, Nayna Jain wrote: > Currently, get_burstcount() function sleeps for 5msec in a loop > before retrying for next query to burstcount. However, if it takes > lesser time for TPM to return, this 5msec delay is longer > than necessary. > > This patch replaces the tpm_msleep time from 5msec to 1msec. > > After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte > burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~10sec to ~9sec. > > Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Acked-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c > index 224842e06105..826a0b9c9201 100644 > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c > @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static int get_burstcount(struct tpm_chip *chip) > burstcnt = (value >> 8) & 0xFFFF; > if (burstcnt) > return burstcnt; > - tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT); > + tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP); > } while (time_before(jiffies, stop)); > return -EBUSY; > } > -- > 2.13.3 > Would it make sense to squash this to 3/5 and merge the commit messages? /Jarkko
On 10/12/2017 04:48 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 06:29:23AM -0400, Nayna Jain wrote: >> Currently, get_burstcount() function sleeps for 5msec in a loop >> before retrying for next query to burstcount. However, if it takes >> lesser time for TPM to return, this 5msec delay is longer >> than necessary. >> >> This patch replaces the tpm_msleep time from 5msec to 1msec. >> >> After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte >> burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~10sec to ~9sec. >> >> Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> Acked-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> --- >> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c >> index 224842e06105..826a0b9c9201 100644 >> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c >> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c >> @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static int get_burstcount(struct tpm_chip *chip) >> burstcnt = (value >> 8) & 0xFFFF; >> if (burstcnt) >> return burstcnt; >> - tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT); >> + tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP); >> } while (time_before(jiffies, stop)); >> return -EBUSY; >> } >> -- >> 2.13.3 >> > Would it make sense to squash this to 3/5 and merge the commit > messages? Yeah.. it sounds reasonable.. both are reducing the sleep delay time for same purpose, just in different functions. Thanks & Regards, - Nayna > > /Jarkko >
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c index 224842e06105..826a0b9c9201 100644 --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static int get_burstcount(struct tpm_chip *chip) burstcnt = (value >> 8) & 0xFFFF; if (burstcnt) return burstcnt; - tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT); + tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP); } while (time_before(jiffies, stop)); return -EBUSY; }