From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from chumsalmon.baetis.net (chumsalmon.baetis.net [209.222.21.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 205A32F5484; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 10:24:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.222.21.150 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756722288; cv=none; b=I2xmjTa+2yoO/olSl5AMUKTrkPqjvHrEuQdZ9693AY2hKYORSBPjhy1rDXbtKzyk0zPRk9A4R9S5B/fv8iZiD9y5GsDUa+UG2gt/jR4Cad8ZIPBixRjij3R9Z0pULcyftaNhoesSnQxgEDTLe3fHLJgpdkaHbU+s8m3wpSD+pvY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756722288; c=relaxed/simple; bh=u7YCD9fr0ldbGVoQNxWglQgoPoPk6uWhscfR4YAgSE4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=JoYPJBMMLUSfkVR3a29ilEbsba7/pZVULyya2BqI1Z1qHlf3GGSgLL+gu83O5ZpWmFRAXL0tJZw5eupFzvpYGTJqTHIDINLvuobsXgMOikKTqRURprpBau0+4NKk0IxDPrTa6M8FFZt0MHcbbEmCxisoXiqJzaIqc4bAbiphnTk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=tahomasoft.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tahomasoft.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tahomasoft.com header.i=@tahomasoft.com header.b=MEkLwsit; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.222.21.150 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=tahomasoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tahomasoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tahomasoft.com header.i=@tahomasoft.com header.b="MEkLwsit" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tahomasoft.com; s=default; t=1756722278; bh=u7YCD9fr0ldbGVoQNxWglQgoPoPk6uWhscfR4YAgSE4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=MEkLwsitD11xl2cD3/PnCGFmrbkuPWWYg4uyCHww4j27rrZgEcRG4VFMr+pv2ypYA VSRMs4cWKiZhYipgzNh+khUe1OTde+q8WVLOTwD+ZANLp53bn7pyUpt6JuWozpiCIo vD1TmzSPwLH9QsS3oJAGZh5EDylfAZuEVDFYobhliLoTJ0jbMUSi9BG3LBaYOOhbLZ sjPu1leMqMcNo5Y3NsHUMs2OoVDlB5SlhozYqdP0vxsT6wEtyDMON2R+sm8kqq3mlR 1HOEdvMUQbNwqq10W2tLiLDfCt62c/pWcRnocMNwU++Fzmqsov5d1zLYHnEmMYv/BE WRqoXtBZ9waRQ== Received: from WahpenayoPeak.tahoma.link (unknown [IPv6:2600:4040:50be:5a04:19eb:3ff6:89a2:9ef0]) (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 A49DF27E468; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 10:24:38 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 06:24:37 -0400 From: Erik Beck To: Chukun Pan Cc: 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, Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add HINLINK H68K Message-ID: <20250901062437.780cc71a.xunil@tahomasoft.com> In-Reply-To: <20250901070008.68662-1-amadeus@jmu.edu.cn> References: <20250830171409.592c1f63.xunil@tahomasoft.com> <20250901070008.68662-1-amadeus@jmu.edu.cn> Organization: Tahoma Soft X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.49; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 15:00:08 +0800 Chukun Pan wrote: > Hi, > > > Please change phy-mode here to "rgmii". This change will yield an > > ethernet speed throughput change of a factor of 100+. > > > Same as above: Please change phy-mode here to "rgmii". This change > > will yield an ethernet speed throughput change of a factor of 100+. > > This doesn't make sense. When I first submitted it to coolsnowwolf/lede > in 2022, I used "rgmii-id" as the phy-mode, and it worked: > https://github.com/coolsnowwolf/lede/blob/master/target/linux/rockchip/files/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3568-opc-h68k.dts#L24 > > Are you experiencing issues with both eth0 and eth1 or just one of them? > Are you using the generic-rk3568 target for U-Boot? > Hi Chukun, thanks for your response. At Andrew Lunn's suggestion, I'm doing more granular and rigorous testing, now using iperf3. I'll post more details of results here after I retest a couple of scenarios. However, I will report now that so far, I'm getting better (faster) and more consistent results using iperf3. ~Erik > I can't reproduce your problem in my test. > > eth0/gmac1 (as lan): > root@OpenWrt:~# iperf3 -c 192.168.1.100 > Connecting to host 192.168.1.100, port 5201 > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 1.10 GBytes 942 Mbits/sec 29 sender > [ 5] 0.00-10.04 sec 1.10 GBytes 936 Mbits/sec > receiver > > root@OpenWrt:~# iperf3 -c 192.168.1.100 -R > Connecting to host 192.168.1.100, port 5201 > Reverse mode, remote host 192.168.1.100 is sending > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr > [ 5] 0.00-10.04 sec 1.10 GBytes 939 Mbits/sec 1 sender > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 1.10 GBytes 941 Mbits/sec > receiver > > eth1/gmac0 (as wan): > root@OpenWrt:~# iperf3 -c 192.168.0.2 -P 4 > Connecting to host 192.168.0.2, port 5201 > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr > [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 1.10 GBytes 945 Mbits/sec 1191 > sender [SUM] 0.00-10.05 sec 1.09 GBytes 935 Mbits/sec > receiver > > root@OpenWrt:~# iperf3 -c 192.168.0.2 -R > Connecting to host 192.168.0.2, port 5201 > Reverse mode, remote host 192.168.0.2 is sending > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr > [ 5] 0.00-10.06 sec 1.10 GBytes 939 Mbits/sec 6 sender > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 1.10 GBytes 941 Mbits/sec > receiver > > -- > 2.25.1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-rockchip mailing list > Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip