FSYNC switch

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

Added fsync on/off support.

Signed-off-by: Francisco Franco <franciscofranco.1990@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: flar2 <asegaert@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit a66b4b71cbf9d602fe628a4a54a08a4e47d119b9)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <ironbuang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	fs/sync.c

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

fs: sync: add missing return if fsync is disabled from userspace.

Signed-off-by: Francisco Franco <franciscofranco.1990@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: flar2 <asegaert@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit d34774c522eeff54cb2605dee7d8a8ab2f5b2800)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <ironbuang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	fs/sync.c

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

add fsync switch to configs

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <ironbuang@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	fs/Kconfig
	fs/sync.c

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
lib/memcopy: use glibc version

the kernel's memcpy and memmove is very inefficient. But the glibc version is
quite fast, in some cases it is 10 times faster than the kernel version. So I
introduce some memory copy macros and functions of the glibc to improve the
kernel version's performance.

The strategy of the memory functions is:
1. Copy bytes until the destination pointer is aligned.
2. Copy words in unrolled loops.  If the source and destination are not
   aligned in the same way, use word memory operations, but shift and merge
   two read words before writing.
3. Copy the few remaining bytes.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox*******>
Signed-off-by: faux123 <reioux@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 607e8be1779a66f711eb7bdb2b1d9e87c6f06cd1)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
lib/string: use glibc version

the performance of memcpy and memmove of the general version is very
inefficient, this patch improved them.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox*******>
Signed-off-by: faux123 <reioux@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit fa97c2086987bed479f6ba301024eb9c95d203d1)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
mmc/core: CRC??? disable it,,,

as it states here
"Enabling software CRCs on the data blocks can be a significant (30%)performance cost, and for other reasons may not always be desired."
so i'll just go ahead and disable it then.. :D

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	drivers/mmc/core/core.c
arch: arm: lib: optimize memcpy for cortex-A15

The LDRD/STRD instruction is faster than LDM/STM on Cortex-A15.
Also optimized preload cache size for Cortex-A15.

Added USE_LDRDSTRD_OVER_LDMSTM to turn on LDRD/STRD optimization.
Added ARM_PLD_SIZE, default 32. Should set to 64 for Cortex-A15.

Bug 1185248

Signed-off-by: Chandler Zhang <chazhang@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Krishna Reddy <vdumpa@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 4ab1aab8b647272b05d4ef0a72a1a0faa8a65023)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
use GCC builtin prefetching

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
fs/dcache.c: adaptive vfs_cache_pressure on suspend / resume

low vfs_cache pressure values save battery while idle, while
a low value also causes stutter with longer up times.

(cherry picked from commit c04bcc1f767b80ac310586a58eee92be51de295f)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
cache_pressure despite the dynamic suspend/resume values

(cherry picked from commit 9f8163b377d4a1040cf9d18c983d97e0f9ec0bd1)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
ARM: 7494/1: use generic termios.h

As pointed out by Arnd Bergmann, this fixes a couple of issues but will
increase code size:

The original macro user_termio_to_kernel_termios was not endian safe. It
used an unsigned short ptr to access the low bits in a 32-bit word.

Both user_termio_to_kernel_termios and kernel_termios_to_user_termio are
missing error checking on put_user/get_user and copy_to/from_user.

Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>
Reviewed-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: franciscofranco <franciscofranco.1990@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 37b1802fb6696d5dcc5184d90c4492c031d28f7b)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	arch/arm/include/asm/Kbuild

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
ARM: 7493/1: use generic unaligned.h

This moves ARM over to the asm-generic/unaligned.h header. This has the
benefit of better code generated especially for ARMv7 on gcc 4.7+
compilers.

As Arnd Bergmann, points out: The asm-generic version uses the "struct"
version for native-endian unaligned access and the "byteshift" version
for the opposite endianess. The current ARM version however uses the
"byteshift" implementation for both.

Thanks to Nicolas Pitre for the excellent analysis:

Test case:

int foo (int *x) { return get_unaligned(x); }
long long bar (long long *x) { return get_unaligned(x); }

With the current ARM version:

foo:
	ldrb	r3, [r0, #2]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 2B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 2B]
	ldrb	r1, [r0, #1]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 1B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 1B]
	ldrb	r2, [r0, #0]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D)], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D)]
	mov	r3, r3, asl #16	@ tmp154, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 2B],
	ldrb	r0, [r0, #3]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 3B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 3B]
	orr	r3, r3, r1, asl #8	@, tmp155, tmp154, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 1B],
	orr	r3, r3, r2	@ tmp157, tmp155, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D)]
	orr	r0, r3, r0, asl #24	@,, tmp157, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 3B],
	bx	lr	@

bar:
	stmfd	sp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7}	@,
	mov	r2, #0	@ tmp184,
	ldrb	r5, [r0, #6]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 6B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 6B]
	ldrb	r4, [r0, #5]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 5B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 5B]
	ldrb	ip, [r0, #2]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 2B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 2B]
	ldrb	r1, [r0, #4]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 4B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 4B]
	mov	r5, r5, asl #16	@ tmp175, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 6B],
	ldrb	r7, [r0, #1]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 1B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 1B]
	orr	r5, r5, r4, asl #8	@, tmp176, tmp175, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 5B],
	ldrb	r6, [r0, #7]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 7B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 7B]
	orr	r5, r5, r1	@ tmp178, tmp176, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 4B]
	ldrb	r4, [r0, #0]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D)], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D)]
	mov	ip, ip, asl #16	@ tmp188, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 2B],
	ldrb	r1, [r0, #3]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 3B], MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 3B]
	orr	ip, ip, r7, asl #8	@, tmp189, tmp188, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 1B],
	orr	r3, r5, r6, asl #24	@,, tmp178, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 7B],
	orr	ip, ip, r4	@ tmp191, tmp189, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D)]
	orr	ip, ip, r1, asl #24	@, tmp194, tmp191, MEM[(const u8 *)x_1(D) + 3B],
	mov	r1, r3	@,
	orr	r0, r2, ip	@ tmp171, tmp184, tmp194
	ldmfd	sp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7}
	bx	lr

In both cases the code is slightly suboptimal.  One may wonder why
wasting r2 with the constant 0 in the second case for example.  And all
the mov's could be folded in subsequent orr's, etc.

Now with the asm-generic version:

foo:
	ldr	r0, [r0, #0]	@ unaligned	@,* x
	bx	lr	@

bar:
	mov	r3, r0	@ x, x
	ldr	r0, [r0, #0]	@ unaligned	@,* x
	ldr	r1, [r3, #4]	@ unaligned	@,
	bx	lr	@

This is way better of course, but only because this was compiled for
ARMv7. In this case the compiler knows that the hardware can do
unaligned word access.  This isn't that obvious for foo(), but if we
remove the get_unaligned() from bar as follows:

long long bar (long long *x) {return *x; }

then the resulting code is:

bar:
	ldmia	r0, {r0, r1}	@ x,,
	bx	lr	@

So this proves that the presumed aligned vs unaligned cases does have
influence on the instructions the compiler may use and that the above
unaligned code results are not just an accident.

Still... this isn't fully conclusive without at least looking at the
resulting assembly fron a pre ARMv6 compilation.  Let's see with an
ARMv5 target:

foo:
	ldrb	r3, [r0, #0]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp139,* x
	ldrb	r1, [r0, #1]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp140,
	ldrb	r2, [r0, #2]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp143,
	ldrb	r0, [r0, #3]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp146,
	orr	r3, r3, r1, asl #8	@, tmp142, tmp139, tmp140,
	orr	r3, r3, r2, asl #16	@, tmp145, tmp142, tmp143,
	orr	r0, r3, r0, asl #24	@,, tmp145, tmp146,
	bx	lr	@

bar:
	stmfd	sp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7}	@,
	ldrb	r2, [r0, #0]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp139,* x
	ldrb	r7, [r0, #1]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp140,
	ldrb	r3, [r0, #4]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp149,
	ldrb	r6, [r0, #5]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp150,
	ldrb	r5, [r0, #2]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp143,
	ldrb	r4, [r0, #6]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp153,
	ldrb	r1, [r0, #7]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp156,
	ldrb	ip, [r0, #3]	@ zero_extendqisi2	@ tmp146,
	orr	r2, r2, r7, asl #8	@, tmp142, tmp139, tmp140,
	orr	r3, r3, r6, asl #8	@, tmp152, tmp149, tmp150,
	orr	r2, r2, r5, asl #16	@, tmp145, tmp142, tmp143,
	orr	r3, r3, r4, asl #16	@, tmp155, tmp152, tmp153,
	orr	r0, r2, ip, asl #24	@,, tmp145, tmp146,
	orr	r1, r3, r1, asl #24	@,, tmp155, tmp156,
	ldmfd	sp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7}
	bx	lr

Compared to the initial results, this is really nicely optimized and I
couldn't do much better if I were to hand code it myself.

Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>
Reviewed-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
modified for Mako from kernel.org reference

Signed-off-by: faux123 <reioux@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 04a9884c4b9aed133d53ef9ba3b0104420c7602e)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	arch/arm/include/asm/Kbuild

Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
arm: compile with the generic rwsem

Signed-off-by: franciscofranco <franciscofranco.1990@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 819f705b8a1e3cc84dbefc444f82fee421f4ec66)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
net: loopback: set default mtu to 64K

loopback current mtu of 16436 bytes allows no more than 3 MSS TCP
segments per frame, or 48 Kbytes. Changing mtu to 64K allows TCP
stack to build large frames and significantly reduces stack overhead.

Performance boost on bulk TCP transferts can be up to 30 %, partly
because we now have one ACK message for two 64KB segments, and a lower
probability of hitting /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_reordering default limit.

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: franciscofranco <franciscofranco.1990@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 76b42678097c3f0300f74877edc0bafb512387f2)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>
mm: Adjust dirty writeback for IO boost

(cherry picked from commit aaaf1845274ad3a4a77a1d725be8d4a5b43dac52)
Signed-off-by: thirdzcee <thirdzcee@gmail.com>