Linux Documentation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
	Min Li <min.li@microchip.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Petr Oros <poros@redhat.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
	Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 1/3] dpll: zl3073x: scale poll interval proportionally to timeout
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 14:19:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b2173b95-a110-4301-870f-b54145028e6f@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260809182340.1081610-2-ivecera@redhat.com>

Sashiko findings with comments:

 > Since zl3073x_poll_zero_u8() is the single shared polling helper, 
does this
 > also change the poll granularity for all the pre-existing callers [...]
 > sleep_us becomes 500 us, 1000 us, 1000 us, 600 us and 1000 us 
respectively

Yes, the change affects all callers. Testing showed that the
existing callers typically completed in low hundreds of sleep cycles
with the fixed 10 us interval. With the scaled interval, the cycle
count dropped to single digits — a much better fit for the actual
hardware response times.

 > Does the flash path also get slower? [...]
 > over the tens of thousands of words in a firmware or utility image
 > could add a noticeable amount of time to a devlink flash.

No. Firmware flash operations were tested with no observable
regression. The overall flash time remained the same because the
reduced number of sleep cycles compensates for the longer individual
sleep intervals.

 > Would clamping the derived interval [...] reach the stated goal [...]
 > without changing the existing 25-50 ms call sites?

Given the test results above, clamping is not necessary.

 > Reading this, one would conclude the existing 25-50 ms call sites 
keep their
 > old behaviour [...]  Could the changelog mention the effect on the 
existing
 > [...] polls?

Fair point. Will update the changelog to mention that all callers are
affected.

 > Is "approximately 50 iterations" accurate?

Will reword to avoid the specific iteration count claim.

Thanks,
Ivan


  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-11 12:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-09 18:23 [PATCH net-next v6 0/3] dpll: zl3073x: add PTP clock support Ivan Vecera
2026-08-09 18:23 ` [PATCH net-next v6 1/3] dpll: zl3073x: scale poll interval proportionally to timeout Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:19   ` Ivan Vecera [this message]
2026-08-11 12:20   ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-09 18:23 ` [PATCH net-next v6 2/3] dpll: zl3073x: add channel ToD, phase step and TIE operations Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:21   ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:22   ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-09 18:23 ` [PATCH net-next v6 3/3] dpll: zl3073x: add PTP clock support Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:25   ` Ivan Vecera
2026-08-11 12:26   ` Ivan Vecera

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=b2173b95-a110-4301-870f-b54145028e6f@redhat.com \
    --to=ivecera@redhat.com \
    --cc=arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=min.li@microchip.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=poros@redhat.com \
    --cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox