From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Eugene Surovegin <ebs@ebshome.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ibm_newemac: Increase number of default rx-/tx-buffers
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:10:57 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1200089457.6896.65.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080111174822.GB17240@gate.ebshome.net>
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 09:48 -0800, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 01:38:17PM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > On Saturday 05 January 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 10:50 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > > > Performance tests done by AMCC have shown that 256 buffer increase the
> > > > performance of the Linux EMAC driver. So let's update the default
> > > > values to match this setup.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>
> > > > ---
> > >
> > > Do we have the numbers ? Did they also measure latency ?
> >
> > I hoped this question would not come. ;) No, unfortunately I don't have any
> > numbers. Just the recommendation from AMCC to always use 256 buffers.
>
> This cannot be true for all chips. Default numbers I selected weren't
> random. In particular, 256 for Tx doesn't make a lot of sense for 405.
> You just gonna waste memory.
>
> I'd be quite reluctant to follow such advices from AMCC without actual
> details.
I think we can make defaults based on other config options nowadays. Not
very nice but we could do things like
default 128 if PPC_40x
default 256
Or even more detailed.
Cheers,
Ben.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Eugene Surovegin <ebs@ebshome.net>
Cc: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ibm_newemac: Increase number of default rx-/tx-buffers
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:10:57 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1200089457.6896.65.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080111174822.GB17240@gate.ebshome.net>
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 09:48 -0800, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 01:38:17PM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > On Saturday 05 January 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 10:50 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > > > Performance tests done by AMCC have shown that 256 buffer increase the
> > > > performance of the Linux EMAC driver. So let's update the default
> > > > values to match this setup.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>
> > > > ---
> > >
> > > Do we have the numbers ? Did they also measure latency ?
> >
> > I hoped this question would not come. ;) No, unfortunately I don't have any
> > numbers. Just the recommendation from AMCC to always use 256 buffers.
>
> This cannot be true for all chips. Default numbers I selected weren't
> random. In particular, 256 for Tx doesn't make a lot of sense for 405.
> You just gonna waste memory.
>
> I'd be quite reluctant to follow such advices from AMCC without actual
> details.
I think we can make defaults based on other config options nowadays. Not
very nice but we could do things like
default 128 if PPC_40x
default 256
Or even more detailed.
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-11 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-05 9:50 [PATCH] ibm_newemac: Increase number of default rx-/tx-buffers Stefan Roese
2008-01-05 9:50 ` Stefan Roese
2008-01-05 10:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-05 12:38 ` Stefan Roese
2008-01-05 20:53 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-05 21:48 ` Josh Boyer
2008-01-05 21:48 ` Josh Boyer
2008-01-05 21:54 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-05 21:54 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-06 1:43 ` Josh Boyer
2008-01-06 1:43 ` Josh Boyer
2008-01-11 17:48 ` Eugene Surovegin
2008-01-11 22:10 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2008-01-11 22:10 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-12 7:26 ` Stefan Roese
2008-01-12 7:26 ` Stefan Roese
2008-01-12 7:57 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-12 7:57 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-12 9:08 ` Eugene Surovegin
2008-01-12 9:08 ` Eugene Surovegin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1200089457.6896.65.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=ebs@ebshome.net \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sr@denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.