From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] add one parameter wro_enable to enable relaxed ordering for IXGBE
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 00:42:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1477726941.2309.9.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1477724932-5440-1-git-send-email-maowenan@huawei.com>
On Sat, 2016-10-29 at 15:08 +0800, Mao Wenan wrote:
> This patch provides a way to enable relaxed ordering, where it helps with
> performance in some architecture.
> The default value of wro_enable is 0, if you want to enable relaxed
> ordering, please set wro_enable=1.
>
> Mao Wenan (1):
> ? add one parameter wro_enable for IXGBE
>
> ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe.h??????? |? 1 +
> ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_82598.c? | 29 ++++++++++++++-----
> ------
> ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_common.c | 28 +++++++++++++----
> -------
> ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c?? |? 9 ++++++++
> ?4 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
Why have a title patch for only one patch? ?Better yet, the one patch does
not have a patch description. ?Get rid of the title patch and add the above
information into the patches description.
In addition, module parameters are not kindly looked upon, one reason is
that it cannot be standardized and enforced.
I am also confused because you are stating that on some architectures, yet
this code is only compiled in when SPARC is defined and that there are
times when you want relaxed ordering enabled and other times disabled?
?Your gonna have to provide more data on why, because the code as is was
resolving serious performance issues on SPARC when relaxed ordering was
enabled.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/intel-wired-lan/attachments/20161029/8b4f7b65/attachment.asc>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
To: Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com>,
intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add one parameter wro_enable to enable relaxed ordering for IXGBE
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 00:42:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1477726941.2309.9.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1477724932-5440-1-git-send-email-maowenan@huawei.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1417 bytes --]
On Sat, 2016-10-29 at 15:08 +0800, Mao Wenan wrote:
> This patch provides a way to enable relaxed ordering, where it helps with
> performance in some architecture.
> The default value of wro_enable is 0, if you want to enable relaxed
> ordering, please set wro_enable=1.
>
> Mao Wenan (1):
> add one parameter wro_enable for IXGBE
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe.h | 1 +
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_82598.c | 29 ++++++++++++++-----
> ------
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_common.c | 28 +++++++++++++----
> -------
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c | 9 ++++++++
> 4 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
Why have a title patch for only one patch? Better yet, the one patch does
not have a patch description. Get rid of the title patch and add the above
information into the patches description.
In addition, module parameters are not kindly looked upon, one reason is
that it cannot be standardized and enforced.
I am also confused because you are stating that on some architectures, yet
this code is only compiled in when SPARC is defined and that there are
times when you want relaxed ordering enabled and other times disabled?
Your gonna have to provide more data on why, because the code as is was
resolving serious performance issues on SPARC when relaxed ordering was
enabled.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-29 7:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-29 7:08 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] add one parameter wro_enable to enable relaxed ordering for IXGBE Mao Wenan
2016-10-29 7:08 ` Mao Wenan
2016-10-29 7:08 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] add one parameter wro_enable " Mao Wenan
2016-10-29 7:08 ` Mao Wenan
2016-10-29 7:42 ` Jeff Kirsher [this message]
2016-10-29 7:42 ` [PATCH] add one parameter wro_enable to enable relaxed ordering " Jeff Kirsher
2016-11-09 9:43 ` [Intel-wired-lan] 答复: " maowenan
2016-11-09 9:43 ` maowenan
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=1477726941.2309.9.camel@intel.com \
--to=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/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.