From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADDE4CA0FFE for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2025 15:53:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To: From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=OHhmYTXZV2lWj30LY0c7VICtklAkf1w3iVz5L0hSoCU=; b=FT4mX0s2gTqg7FTNpWKNBSp58Q jI2VvnwTeQ28bpH9scMokqy2Wk2P8qyjrf5D1+717ESOxYe8yhI1wrlrTSiSsXGYLgzB6KSdzkR8M 9Wf+DsQHonN8Polk/kOpssunQ5pLCQdmgLhnpAuyXaYplgvmsaCDnttJkZcvkyZTVq/XzyuRXgqSa zBsnMRymBA3a4iVJIDC/Uqz6sjRzkkR0EmmqC3OE0/bnYGBbUdZkoAVHL/MBZx9Bjytds3dLKy0ij DIcPQMKF6w3Fv5mlT/MDKbHCdVy2re3Xh66fCAb+aXg7SPyN8YF2qkaoLAa6FQCSP1Ccmr2DlPZRs u/GCQdrQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1utTJw-00000000nWX-0uGs; Tue, 02 Sep 2025 15:53:20 +0000 Received: from chumsalmon.baetis.net ([209.222.21.150]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1utPq8-0000000H8JG-3nVC; Tue, 02 Sep 2025 12:10:22 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tahomasoft.com; s=default; t=1756815015; bh=5XjTx7iK7PHq+3BKdY0v5CJO3xIQLjdIo808+rqI8JM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=J+4N4aq6ngHs+ccgv27484VTZULp5l5v/wrlliCsZwWYcCoaNPhdAW/RoqndD8J+n HOIs/OyO2bVuZufZMOObfjWNTCXguJDsXEL64wszwixL10CNyyQLlTThhKW5hA5fI6 Qftx6w7hSZyFoUUIzNXYYSxB0HV5qUfWu5rdRow0erHV5xYhTUHBkYYIrl/c2PmmlT sF4GDsBDK3lPXFGcsOlzdePwHGewdw+hFibP89j59+ah3v7La+Hy6oo9Q2E/7PnZee jmXXDy0bY0A66fjWs3RPFY3HI36/Er/CM/u0QApZdKWhr/n5UKe8n3xqCgECi1Urka MofjlD47NFgdQ== Received: from WahpenayoPeak.tahoma.link (unknown [IPv6:2600:4040:50be:5a04:892f:ee51:308e:70d0]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by chumsalmon.baetis.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1DBC827E436; Tue, 2 Sep 2025 12:10:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 08:10:14 -0400 From: Erik Beck To: Chukun Pan Cc: andrew@lunn.ch, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, heiko@sntech.de, krzk+dt@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add HINLINK H68K Message-ID: <20250902081014.0e6eaaf2.xunil@tahomasoft.com> In-Reply-To: <20250902070019.856305-1-amadeus@jmu.edu.cn> References: <20250901100639.234ba07b.xunil@tahomasoft.com> <20250902070019.856305-1-amadeus@jmu.edu.cn> Organization: Tahoma Soft X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.49; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250902_051020_997372_3055F8EF X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 18.48 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, 2 Sep 2025 15:00:19 +0800 Chukun Pan wrote: > Hi, Greetings! > > > So what I said earlier regarding rgmii vs rgmii-id DOES NOT hold up > > under more rigorous and careful testing. > > So the following question does not exist? Yes, that is correct. My earlier question/comment/concern about a huge speed difference between rgmii-id mode and rmgmii doesn't seem to exist when more careful experiments and testing methods are used. I'll elaborate some more below. And I apologize for any inconvenience. > >> Changing this makes a huge difference in the ethernet throughput speed. > >> With rgmii-id mode specified, throughput is about 6.5 Mbs. Changing this > >> to rgmii mode increases throughput to about 960 Mbs. > I'm still a bit surprised that my first test method (web-based, like fast.com or self-hosted internal download speeds) gave such different results from more comprehensive and careful testing with iperf3. While certainly web-based methods can't target a particular interface, nor do they have many other potential adjustments or refinements (UDP vs TCP, etc), they have been and continue to be a useful tool for me to get quick information about the status and health of my network and its devices. > If the iperf3 test does not reach Gigabit, you can run it in > multiple threads. e.g. `iperf3 -c xxx -P 4` Thanks for the tip. I remain keenly interested in seeing a patch for the Hinlink/LinkStar devices make it into the mainline kernel. Please let me know how I can help your (and others) efforts to accomplish that. Regards, Erik