From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936573AbeCBQeH (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Mar 2018 11:34:07 -0500 Received: from mail.bootlin.com ([62.4.15.54]:38358 "EHLO mail.bootlin.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936304AbeCBQeC (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Mar 2018 11:34:02 -0500 Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 17:11:17 +0100 From: Thomas Petazzoni To: Antoine Tenart Cc: davem@davemloft.net, Yan Markman , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com, gregory.clement@bootlin.com, miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, nadavh@marvell.com, stefanc@marvell.com, mw@semihalf.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] net: mvpp2: use a data size of 10kB for Tx FIFO on port 0 Message-ID: <20180302171117.2344a893@windsurf.lan> In-Reply-To: <20180302154044.25204-4-antoine.tenart@bootlin.com> References: <20180302154044.25204-1-antoine.tenart@bootlin.com> <20180302154044.25204-4-antoine.tenart@bootlin.com> Organization: Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.1-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 16:40:42 +0100, Antoine Tenart wrote: > -/* Initialize Tx FIFO's */ > +/* Initialize Tx FIFO's > + * The CP110's total tx-fifo size is 19kB. > + * Use large-size 10kB for fast port but 3kB for others. > + */ Is there a reason to hardcode 10KB for port 0, and 3KB for the other ports ? Would there be use cases where the user may want different configurations ? It's just that it feels very "hardcoded" to enforce specifically those numbers. Also, does it make sense to mention the CP110 here ? Is this 19 KB limitation a limit of the PPv2.2 IP, or of the CP110 ? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://bootlin.com