From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:50:29 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v4 net-next] ravb: Add dma queue interrupt support Message-Id: <56AA38C5.6070004@cogentembedded.com> List-Id: References: <1453650775-19886-1-git-send-email-ykaneko0929@gmail.com> <20160126002300.GA27856@verge.net.au> <56A7C252.3040707@cogentembedded.com> <20160127014944.GD27499@verge.net.au> In-Reply-To: <20160127014944.GD27499@verge.net.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Simon Horman Cc: Yoshihiro Kaneko , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Magnus Damm , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org Hello. On 01/27/2016 04:49 AM, Simon Horman wrote: >>>> From: Kazuya Mizuguchi Kaneko-san, with the amount of the review changes, it might make sense for you to assume the authorship of this patch, only noting it's based on Mizuguchi-san's work. In principle, when you change the original patch, you should document the changes you made in the change log, above ---... >>>> This patch supports the following interrupts. >>>> >>>> - One interrupt for multiple (descriptor, error, management) >>>> - One interrupt for emac >>>> - Four interrupts for dma queue (best effort rx/tx, network control rx/tx) >>>> >>>> This patch improve efficiency of the interrupt handler by adding the >>>> interrupt handler corresponding to each interrupt source described >>>> above. Additionally, it reduces the number of times of the access to >>>> EthernetAVB IF. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kazuya Mizuguchi >>>> Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Kaneko >>> >>> I have tested this patch and the result seems positive. >> >> Tested on gen3 only I guess? > > Yes, that is correct. > >>> Please let me know if any more/different testing would help. >> >> Sanity testing on some gen2 SoC wouldn't hurt (if you have time). > > I don't believe that I have access to a gen2 board (+ extra hardware ?) > where ravb works. Sorry, I just forgot about that. > If you do would it be possible for you to do a sanity test? Yes, of course. MBR, Sergei From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v4 net-next] ravb: Add dma queue interrupt support Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:50:29 +0300 Message-ID: <56AA38C5.6070004@cogentembedded.com> References: <1453650775-19886-1-git-send-email-ykaneko0929@gmail.com> <20160126002300.GA27856@verge.net.au> <56A7C252.3040707@cogentembedded.com> <20160127014944.GD27499@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Yoshihiro Kaneko , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Magnus Damm , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org To: Simon Horman Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-f43.google.com ([209.85.215.43]:35216 "EHLO mail-lf0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966653AbcA1Pud (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:50:33 -0500 Received: by mail-lf0-f43.google.com with SMTP id c192so29571704lfe.2 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 07:50:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20160127014944.GD27499@verge.net.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hello. On 01/27/2016 04:49 AM, Simon Horman wrote: >>>> From: Kazuya Mizuguchi Kaneko-san, with the amount of the review changes, it might make sense for you to assume the authorship of this patch, only noting it's based on Mizuguchi-san's work. In principle, when you change the original patch, you should document the changes you made in the change log, above ---... >>>> This patch supports the following interrupts. >>>> >>>> - One interrupt for multiple (descriptor, error, management) >>>> - One interrupt for emac >>>> - Four interrupts for dma queue (best effort rx/tx, network control rx/tx) >>>> >>>> This patch improve efficiency of the interrupt handler by adding the >>>> interrupt handler corresponding to each interrupt source described >>>> above. Additionally, it reduces the number of times of the access to >>>> EthernetAVB IF. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kazuya Mizuguchi >>>> Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Kaneko >>> >>> I have tested this patch and the result seems positive. >> >> Tested on gen3 only I guess? > > Yes, that is correct. > >>> Please let me know if any more/different testing would help. >> >> Sanity testing on some gen2 SoC wouldn't hurt (if you have time). > > I don't believe that I have access to a gen2 board (+ extra hardware ?) > where ravb works. Sorry, I just forgot about that. > If you do would it be possible for you to do a sanity test? Yes, of course. MBR, Sergei