From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: dingtianhong@huawei.com (Ding Tianhong)
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 10:54:24 +0800
Subject: [PATCH net-next v13 3/3] net: hisilicon: new hip04 ethernet driver
In-Reply-To: <3131780.HetDHI4Cfl@wuerfel>
References: <1421217254-12008-1-git-send-email-dingtianhong@huawei.com>
 <1421217254-12008-4-git-send-email-dingtianhong@huawei.com>
 <3131780.HetDHI4Cfl@wuerfel>
Message-ID: <54B72BE0.7040403@huawei.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 2015/1/14 16:53, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 January 2015 14:34:14 Ding Tianhong wrote:
>> +#define HIP04_MAX_TX_COALESCE_USECS    200
>> +#define HIP04_MIN_TX_COALESCE_USECS    100
>> +#define HIP04_MAX_TX_COALESCE_FRAMES   200
>> +#define HIP04_MIN_TX_COALESCE_FRAMES   100
> 
> It's not important, but in case you are creating another version of the
> patch, maybe the allowed range can be extended somewhat. The example values
> I picked when I sent my suggestion were really made up. It's great if
> they work fine, but users might want to  tune this far more depending on
> their workloads,  How about these
> 
> #define HIP04_MAX_TX_COALESCE_USECS    100000
> #define HIP04_MIN_TX_COALESCE_USECS    1
> #define HIP04_MAX_TX_COALESCE_FRAMES   (TX_DESC_NUM - 1)
> #define HIP04_MIN_TX_COALESCE_FRAMES   1
> 

Is it really ok that the so big range may break the driver and hip04 could not work fine?
I am not sure it is ok, I will fix it in next version.
 
Ding

> 	Arnd
> 
> .
>