From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: s.hauer@pengutronix.de (Sascha Hauer) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 08:53:23 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2 net-next] net: fec: add napi support to improve proformance In-Reply-To: References: <1358914330-3768-1-git-send-email-Frank.Li@freescale.com> <20130123072635.GO1906@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: <20130123075323.GU1906@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 03:44:53PM +0800, Frank Li wrote: > > This comment seems rather unnecessary. Also it should be > > > > /* space left and right /* > > > > devicetree bindings should use '-' instead of '_'. The binding > > Documentation should be in the patch adding the bindings. Also > > make sure the devicetree parsing is outside of the path for platform > > based probing. > > > > With this particular binding I'm unsure it should exist anyway since > > it's configuration rather than hardware description. The devicetree > > normally is for hardware description only. > > > > What's your opinion? > Using module parameter, device-tree to config it or the other method? Why do you want to make it configurable anyway? So far no other driver seems to need this. My suggestion is to make it unconfigurable. For adding properties like this to the devicetree remember that they should be OS agnostic. napi is a implementation detail relevant only for Linux. And even Linux may decide to drop napi support in favour for something better in the future. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |