[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] igb: Clarify idleslope config constraints

[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] igb: Clarify idleslope config constraints

[Jesus Sanchez-Palencia]

By design, the idleslope increments are restricted to 16.384kbps steps.
Add a comment to igb_main.c making that explicit and add one example
that illustrates the impact of that.

Signed-off-by: Jesus Sanchez-Palencia <jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
index 43cf39527660..d56c998f3f14 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
@@ -1744,6 +1744,20 @@ static void igb_configure_cbs(struct igb_adapter *adapter, int queue,
 		 *     value = idleSlope * 61034
 		 *             -----------------                          (E6)
 		 *                  1000000
+		 *
+		 * NOTE: For i210, given the above, we can see that idleslope
+		 *       is represented in 16.38431 kbps units by the value at
+		 *       the TQAVCC register (1Gbps / 61034), which reduces
+		 *       the granularity for idleslope increments.
+		 *       For instance, if you want to configure a 2576kbps
+		 *       idleslope, the value to be written on the register
+		 *       would have to be 157.23. If rounded down, you end
+		 *       up with less bandwidth available than originally
+		 *       required (~2572 kbps). If rounded up, you end up
+		 *       with a higher bandwidth (~2589 kbps). Below the
+		 *       approach we take is to always round up the
+		 *       calculated value, so the resulting bandwidth might
+		 *       be slightly higher for some configurations.
 		 */
 		value = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(idleslope * 61034ULL, 1000000);
 
-- 
2.14.1

[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] igb: Clarify idleslope config constraints

[Guedes, Andre]

Reviewed-by:?Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@intel.com>

On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 14:21 -0800, Jesus Sanchez-Palencia wrote:
> By design, the idleslope increments are restricted to 16.384kbps steps.
> Add a comment to igb_main.c making that explicit and add one example
> that illustrates the impact of that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jesus Sanchez-Palencia <jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com>
> ---
> ?drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> ?1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
> index 43cf39527660..d56c998f3f14 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
> @@ -1744,6 +1744,20 @@ static void igb_configure_cbs(struct igb_adapter
> *adapter, int queue,
> ?		?*?????value = idleSlope * 61034
> ?		?*?????????????--------------
> ---??????????????????????????(E6)
> ?		?*??????????????????1000000
> +		?*
> +		?* NOTE: For i210, given the above, we can see that
> idleslope
> +		?*???????is represented in 16.38431 kbps units by the value
> at
> +		?*???????the TQAVCC register (1Gbps / 61034), which reduces
> +		?*???????the granularity for idleslope increments.
> +		?*???????For instance, if you want to configure a 2576kbps
> +		?*???????idleslope, the value to be written on the register
> +		?*???????would have to be 157.23. If rounded down, you end
> +		?*???????up with less bandwidth available than originally
> +		?*???????required (~2572 kbps). If rounded up, you end up
> +		?*???????with a higher bandwidth (~2589 kbps). Below the
> +		?*???????approach we take is to always round up the
> +		?*???????calculated value, so the resulting bandwidth might
> +		?*???????be slightly higher for some configurations.
> ?		?*/
> ?		value = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(idleslope * 61034ULL, 1000000);
> ?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3262 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/intel-wired-lan/attachments/20171110/bf3b55bd/attachment-0001.bin>

[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] igb: Clarify idleslope config constraints

[Brown, Aaron F]

> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-bounces at osuosl.org] On Behalf
> Of Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 2:22 PM
> To: intel-wired-lan at lists.osuosl.org
> Cc: Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus <jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com>; Guedes,
> Andre <andre.guedes@intel.com>; Briano, Ivan <ivan.briano@intel.com>
> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] igb: Clarify idleslope config
> constraints
> 
> By design, the idleslope increments are restricted to 16.384kbps steps.
> Add a comment to igb_main.c making that explicit and add one example
> that illustrates the impact of that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jesus Sanchez-Palencia <jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)

Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@intel.com>